O  PRINCETON,     N.    J.  <ff 

BX  9869  .P3  W3  i 
Walker,  James  Barr,  1805- 

1887.  I 

^^^^ Philosophy  of  skepticism  ai  i 

ultraism  I 


PHILOSOPHY 


OF 


SKEPTICISM    AND    ULTEAISM, 


•WHEEEIN 

THE  OPINIONS  OF  EEV.  THEODORE  PAEKEE,  AND  OTHER 

WEITEES  AEE  SHOWN  TO  BE  INCONSISTENT  WITH 

SOUND  EEASON  AND  TPIE  CHEISTIAN 

EELIGION. 


/ 

BY  JAMES  B   WALKER, 

ATITHOE  OP    "the  PniLOSOPHT  OF  THE  PLAN   OP   SALVATION,"    "GOD 

BEVEALED   IN   THE  PROCESS  OF   CREATION  AND   BY  THE 

MANIFESTATION   OP   OIIBIST,"    ETC. 


NEW   YORK: 

DERBY  &  JACKSON,  119  NASSAU  STREET. 

CINCINNATI:  RICKEY,  MALLORY  &  WEBB. 

CHICAGO:  D.  B.  COOKE  &  CO. 

186Y. 


Entered,  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1857,  by 
DERBY    A    JACKSON, 
In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court,  for  the  Southern  District  of  New  York. 


STEREOTYPED    BY  PRtNTKI)    BY 

THOMAS     U.     SMITH,  GEO.    KUSSEI.L   &   ID 

82  <b  84  Beekman-st.  61  Beekmau-st. 


TO 


|rflf.  Stoto^,  flre0lj0r^  liitlur^  la^^^I]  iarltcr; 

AND     TO     ALL     THINKERS, 

■WHETHER    THEY    BE 

CHRISTIAIf,   SCEPTIC,   OR  REPROBATE, 
a; I) is   boltttne 

IS  MOST  RESPECTFULLY  DEDICATED 
BY  THE  AUTHOR. 


CONTENTS. 


♦-.-♦ 

LETTER  I. 

PAOK. 

The  Nonsense  of  Theodore  Parker's  Theological  Philoso- 
phy      11 

LETTER  n. 

Variations  and  Incongruities  in  the  Theological  Opinions 
OF  Me.  Parker  and  other  Transcendentalists 23 

LETTER  in. 
Misstatements  op  Orthodox  Opinions 31 

LETTER  IT. 
The  Personality  op  God 41 

LETTER  Y. 
The  Tei-tjkity  of  the  Ditine  Mind 61 

LETTER  VL 
Human  Depravity i 80 

LETTER  VII. 
At-one-ment  ;  OR,  Reconciliation  with  God 99 


VI  CONTENTS. 


LETTER  Vin. 

TAOS. 

FUTUEE  ReTEEBUTICN 119 


LETTER  IX. 
Rational  Exposition  op  Probation  and  Reteibution 140 

LETTER  X. 
Eefutation  of  Cosimox  Fallacies  on  the  StrBJECT  of  Fu- 

TUEE  ReTKIBDTION 161 

LETTER  XL 
Refobiieks  and  their  Relation  to  Christianttt 175 

LETTER  XIL 
A  Discrimination  between  the  Good  and  Evil  in  Modern 

REFORilERS 188 

LETTER  XIIL 

Written  Revelation  a  Necessity  in  order  to  the  Moral 
Development  and  Moral  Progress  of  Mankind 213 

LETTER  XIV. 
Revelation  the  Mottve-potiveb  in  Human  Progress 234 

Appendix 273 


PREFACE. 

In  the  following  pages  the  author  has  endeavored  to 
meet,  in  a  popular  form,  some  of  the  prevailing  moral 
fallacies  of  the  times. 

It  is  admitted  by  every  one  who  has  observed  the 
Btate  of  public  opinion  in  relation  to  moral  and  religious 
questions,  that  no  inconsiderable  portion  of  the  business 
men  of  our  cities  and  villages — especially  the  young 
men — are  influenced  by  opinions  which  are  inconsistent 
both  with  sound  reason  and  with  revelation.  This  lit- 
tle volume  is  an  endeavor  to  bring  back  some  who 
have  wandered,  to  a  rational  apprehension  of  religious 
doctrine  and  duty. 

It  asks  the  forbearance  of  the  dogmatic  theologian. 
The  efibrt  of  the  author  is  to  give  the  rationale  of  the 
Christian  doctrines  which  he  discusses.  Those  for  whom 
these  letters  are  mostly  designed  have  chosen  reason, 
rather  than  revelation,  as  arbiter  in  matters  of  faith. 
We  have,  therefore,  permitted  reason  to  speak  freely 
in  behalf  of  revealed  truth,  and  to  speak  sometimes  in 


Vm  PREFACE. 

forms  of  language  that  we  would  not  use  with  those 
who  are  believers  in  divine  revelation. 

We  have,  in  the  discussion,  waived  all  questions  not 
involved  in  the  main  issues,  and  have  granted  to  the 
opposers  and  accusers  of  the  evangelical  ministry  all 
that  a  fair  mind  can  ask  ;  and  as  the-  skei)tics  of  our 
day  claim  a  philosophical  basis  for  many  of  their  opin- 
ions, we  have  endeavored  to  meet  them  on  their  o^ii 
ground. 

One  of  the  volumes  of  Rev.  Theodore  Parker  (Dis- 
courses of  Religion)  was  put  into  our  hands  by  a  friend. 
We  read  it,  and  were  surprised  to  find  a  book  strong 
in  phrase  and  assuming  m  rhetoric  ;  but  without  con- 
gruity,  and,  as  it  seemed  to  us,  out  of  harmony  both 
with  reason  and  revelation. 

With  this  view  of  the  book,  we  commenced  a  series 
of  letters  to  a  friend,  one  of  which  was  published  in  a 
religious  journal.  Other  letters  were  written,  but  not 
published.  In  those  letters  we  referred,  in  two  or 
three  instances,  to  j)ortions  of  two  volumes  previously 
published,  and  to  which  our  respondent  had  access. 
For  the  benefit  of  those  who  may  possess  these  volumes, 
we  have  given  references,  or  condensed  the  thought 
and  put  it  into  another  form. 

These  letters,  with  some  additional  matter  and  a  few 
notes,  are  now  submitted  to  tlie  })ublic.  They  are  re- 
spectfully commended   to  the  consideration  of  those 


PREFACE.  IX 

who  desire  to  act  sincerely  and  intelligently  in  relation 
to  the  matters  in  question.  "  Prove  all  things :  hold 
fast  that  which  is  good,"  is  a  Scripture  precept. 

The  matter  of  some  of  the  letters  has  been  prepared 
in  haste.  The  discussion  covers  the  Hving  issues  of 
our  times  between  the  friends  and  opponents  of  evan- 
gelical Christianity.  The  style  is  as  popular  as  the 
character  of  the  subjects  would  permit.  If  it  shall  an- 
swer the  ends  of  a  hand-book  on  the  subject  of  heter- 
odoxy in  religion  and  reform,  the  author's  aim  will  be 
accomphshed. 


LETTER   I. 

NONSENSE  OF  THEODORE  PARKER'S  THEOLOGICAL 
PHHiOSOPHT. 

My  Dear  Sir: 

I  learned  to  respect  you  for  your  learning 
and  talents  in  by-gone  years.  When  I  first  knew 
you  I  doubted  concerning  the  divine  legation  of 
Moses  and  the  manifestation  of  God  in  Christ. 
Since  then  you  have  departed  in  some  measure 
from  the  faith  which  you  then  commended  to  me. 

It  has  been  matter  of  sincere  regret  to  myself  and 
others  that  a  friend,  who  we  believe  possesses  one 
of  the  best  minds  in  the  land,  should  no  longer  act 
with  us  in  advancing  the  plan  of  Christ  in  the 
world.  But  whatever  may  be  your  convictions  in 
relation  to  the  divine  nature  of  Jesus,  it  surprises 
me  most  of  all  to  be  informed  that  you  listen  with 
apparent  complacency  to  the  teachings  of  Theodore 
Parker  on  the  subject  of  Theism.  Whatever  re- 
gard you  may  have  for  Mr.  Parker  as  a  man  and 
a  reformer — a  regard  which  I  likewise  cherish — 


12    Parker's  theological  philosophy. 

still  I  am  sure  jou  can  see  little  "but  a  verbiage, 
something  like  Carlyleism  diluted,  in  the  style  and 
matter  of  Mr.  Parker's  teaching.  I  confess  that  I 
can  not  see  how  any  one  who  prizes  the  logical  fac- 
ulty so  highly  as  you  do,  should  have  any  respect 
for  such  a  book  as  the  "  Discourses  of  Eeligion," 
which  has  scarcely  a  reliable  logical  process  from  its 
beginning  to  its  close. 

I  think  you  injure  the  character  of  your  country- 
men in  the  estimation  of  thinking  men,  both  at 
home  and  abroad,  by  the  sanction  which  a  dis- 
criminating American  scholar  may  seem  to  give  to 
the  vagaries  of  such  a  writer  as  Mr.  Parker. 

The  course  pursued  by  other  gentlemen  in  rela- 
tion to  Mr.  Parker  as  a  public  teacher,  differs,  in 
my  opinion,  morally,  from  the  same  course  when 
pursued  by  yourself  Men  who  have  little  or  no 
knowledge  of  the  Scriptures,  and  who  af&liate 
mostly  with  those  who  reject  the  authority  of  God 
in  Christ,  if  they  have  sagacity  to  see  the  defection 
from  Christian  principle  which  exists  about  them, 
may  be  expected  to  swell  the  psean  which  hails  the 
anti-scriptural  reformer. 

But  should  any  apparent  defections  in  some  por- 
tions of  the  Christian  church  lead  such  men  as  you 
to  reject  Christian  principle  ? 


paeker's  theological  philosophy.    13 

You  answer  bj  saying  that,  "  When  Parker  has 
the  courage  to  denounce  statesmen  who  prostitute 
their  great  talents,  and  become  recreant  to  the  prin- 
ciples of  freedom  and  humanity  ;  and  when  Greeley 
has  the  courage  to  sustain  the  denouncement, 
although  it  is  against  his  own  party— or  rather 
against  a  self- degraded  man  who  was  the  Magnus 
Apollo  of  his  own  party — the  man,"  you  say, 
"whose  tetter  nature  does  not  sympathize  with  such 
devotion  to  principle,  while  it  reluctates  against 
those  venal  ministers  and  presses  that  are  silent, 
or  become  the  apologists  for  theological  or  political 
sinners,  has  no  better  nature.^'' 

I  have,  you  know,  no  desire  to  abate  any  thing 
from  the  homage  which  you  pay  to  the  moral  cour- 
age of  reformers.  I  only  regret  that  the  class  of 
men  to  whom  you  refer  should  reject  the  faith 
which  alone  can  give  a  right  spirit  and  final  suc- 
cess to  their  efforts.  So  long  as  they  reject  Christ 
as  the  model  and  motive,  they  will  themselves 
grow  more  selfish,  and  their  constant  failures  will 
make  them  misanthropes  in  the  end. 

So  far,  then,  as  Mr.  Parker  and  other  teachers 
and  lecturers  of  his  class  get  indorsement  from 
2/ow,  there  is  ground  for  that  blame  which  always 
attaches  to  those  wlio  hnow  when  they  sanction  the 


14    Parker's  theological  philosophy. 

transfer  of  a  valueless  or  injurious  article  to  those 
who  do  not  know. 

There  are  many  men — ^young  men  especially — 
who  have  paid  little  or  no  attention  to  the  grave 
matters  which  Mr.  Parker  "  talks  about,"  and  who 
no  doubt  suppose  that  his  scholastic  words  and 
phrases  upon  theological  subjects  have  profound 
truth  and  significance  in  them.  You  know  better, 
and  should  not  therefore  give,  even  by  silent  ac- 
quiescence, countenance  to  teachings  which  must 
be  an  offense  to  your  intelligence  if  not  to  your 
conscience. 

Allow  me  here  to  note  for  you  some  passages  in 
Mr.  Parker's  "  Discourses  of  Keligion."  They  will 
sufficiently  indicate  the  character  of  his  theologiz- 
ing, and  warrant  any  language  which  may  seem  to 
you  or  others  to  be  severe  in  the  foregoing  para- 
graphs : 

1.  THE   "  sentiment"   OF   GOD. 

Mr.  Parker  says  (p.  18),  "  The  religious  sentiment 
does  not  disclose  the  character,  and  much  less  the 
nature  and  object,  on  which  it  depends."  ■ 

Again  (p.  27),  "  The  sentiment  of  God,  though 
vague  and  mysterious,  is  always  the  same  in  it- 
self." 


Parker's  theological  philosophy.    15 

2.   THE   "idea"   of  god. 

On  page  24  we  are  told  that  "  the  idea  of  God 
comes  of  the  joint  and  spontaneous  action  of 
reason  and  the  religious  sentiment." 

Again  (p.  27),  "  The  idea  of  God  as  a  fact  given 
in  man's  nature,  and  affording  a  consistent  repre- 
sentation of  its  object,  is  permanent  and  alike  in 
all." 

But  (p.  24)  we  are  told  that  "  The  idea  of  God  is 
perfect  only  when  the  condition^  are  complied 
with" — ^but,  in  a  majority  of  cases,  "  the  conditions 
are  not  complied  with." 

3.   THE   "  conception"   OF   GOD. 

Page  24.  "The  conception  of  God,  as  man 
expresses  it,  is  always  imperfect." 

Page  27.  "  The  conception  of  God  is  of  the 
most  various  and  evanescent  character,  and  is 
not  the  same  in  any  two  ages  or  men." 

Page  95.  "  The  conception  which  man  forms  of 
God  depends  on  his  character." 

In  the  above  passages  the  italics  are  our  own, 
introduced  to  note  the  points  which  we  shall  no- 
tice. The  sense  is  fairly  and  fully  quoted.  They 
are  "  uttered"  mostly  in  the  same  chapter,  and 


16    Parker's  theological  philosophy. 

near  the  beginning  of  the  book.  Taken  together, 
their  absurdity  is  equaled  only  by  other  "  intui- 
tions" of  like  character  which  follow  them  in  the 
same  volume. 

First,  we  are  told  that  the  mind  of  man  has  three 
different  apprehensions  of  God,  which  are  spoken 
of:  SENTIMENT,  IDEA,  and  conception.  Now,  if 
we  suppose  all  these  to  exist  at  the  same  time,  as 
Mr.  Parker  evidently  does,  the  notion  is  a  positive 
absurdity.  They  might  exist  consecutively,  com- 
bined with  a  doubt  which  were  right ;  but  that  they 
should  exist  simultaneously  as  separate  appre- 
hensions, is  contrary  to  the  laws  of  mind. 

If  they  could  exist  simultaneously,  the  one  ap- 
prehension would  nullify  the  other.  One  would  be 
various  and  false,  the  other  permanent  and  true ; 
while  a  third  would  be  mysterious  and  always  the 
same. 

But  if  these  succeed  each  other — which  is  first, 
and  which  is  most  influential  ?  Mr.  Parker  tells  us 
that  the  conception  of  God  is  different  in  all  men, 
and  always  imperfect.  Does  this  "  conception"  ob- 
literate the  idea  which  is  given  as  a  fact  in  man's 
nature  ?  Of  what  benefit  is  a  true  idea  if  it  be  ob- 
literated in  all  men  (except  a  few  such  men  as 
Mr.   Parker)   by   a  conception   which  is    utterly 


Parker's  theological  philosophy.    17 

false  ?  Beside,  how  can  a  sentiment — tlie  same  in 
all — and  an  idea  wliicli  is  a  fact  given  in  man's  na- 
ture, ever  be  varied  or  perverted  by  a  conception 
wbich  is  different  in  all  men  ? 

This    SENTIMENT,     IDEA,     and    CONCEPTION    is     a 

sort  of  trinity  never  before  thought  of — not  a 
trinity  in  unity,  but  a  trinity  in  antagonism  exist- 
ing in  the  same  mind. 

If  man  is  conscious  of  these  three  different  ap- 
prehensions of  God,  either  in  connection  or  in  suc- 
cession, why  does  he  not  choose  one  of  them  ? 
But  if  the  idea  is  a  fact  given  in  his  nature,  then  he 
can  not  obliterate  from  his  mind  a  true  knowledge 
of  God.  And  again,  would  not  the  "  vagueness"  of 
the  sentiment  be  dissipated  by  the  definiteness  of 
the  idea,  or  the  force  of  the  conception  ? 

We  are  told,  on  page  24,  that  the  idea  of  God 
comes  of  the  joint  and  spontaneous  action  of  rea- 
son and  the  religious  sentiment  {action  of  a  senti- 
ment ?),  but  we  are  informed,  on  page  125,  that  this 
vague  and  Indefinite  sentiment,  combined  with  ig- 
norance and  fear,  leads  to  superstition.  And  then, 
on  page  188,  et  seq.,  man  can  by  reason  get  but  an 
imperfect  knowledge  from  nature :  yet  from  a 
vague  and  mysterious  sentiment  and  imperfect  data, 


18    Parker's  theological  philosophy. 

a  Being  of  wisdom,  power,  and  love,  is  derived  by 
tlie  reason. 

But  strange  enough,  in  immediate  connection 
with  this,  the  idea  of  God  is  said  to  be  "a  FACT 
given  in  man's  nature,  which  affords  a  consistent  rep- 
resentation  of  its  object,  PERMANENT  AND  ALIKE  IN 
ALL,"  Thus  it  is  at  the  same  time  an  intuition, 
given  as  a  fact  in  man's  nature,  permanent  and 
alike  in  all,  while  yet  it  is  the  result  of  a  rational 
process,  predicated  upon  a  vague  sentiment  and  im- 
perfect data. 

But  strange  again,  we  are  told  in  the  same  chap- 
ter that  this  idea,  which  is  permanent  and  alike  in 
all,  "  depends  upon  conditions  which,  in  a  majority 
of  cases,  are  not  complied  with." 

How  can  a  fact  which  is  the  same  in  all,  depend 
upon  conditions  ?  Or,  if  the  fact  be  unknown 
until  the  conditions  are  complied  with,  how  can 
any  man  rationally  comply  with  the  conditions  of 
the  unknown  ?  Mr.  Parker  must  solve  such  dif- 
ficulties for  his  friends  by  intuition.  They  are 
without  the  limits  of  reason. 

But  the  conception  of  God,  as  we  have  been  in- 
formed, is  very  different  from  either  the  sentiment 
or  the  idea.  "  It  is  (p.  27)  of  the  most  various  and 
evanescent  character,  and  is  not  the  same  in  any  -two 


paeker's  theological  philosophy.    19 

ages  or  meny  This  conception  of  God,  we  are  told, 
"  depends  on  a  man's  character;"  that  it  is  bad  or 
good  as  a  man  is  bad  or  good ;  and.  that  it  is 
'^always  imperfecV  But  subsequently  we  hear 
something  very  different  of  this  conception.  On 
pp.  156-7,  Mr.  Parker  analyzes  it,  and  finds  in  the 
evanescent  and  imperfect  conception,  which  is  never 
the  same  in  any  two  men,  what  he  denominates  the 
perfect  character  of  God,  He  says  :  "  At  the  end 
of  the  analysis  what  is  left? — Being — Cause — 
Knowledge — Love — each,  with  no  conceivable 
limitations.  To  express  it  in  a  word^  a  Being  of 
infinite  power,  wisdom,  and  goodness.  Thus,  by 
an  analysis  of  the  conception  of  God,  we  find  in  fact, 
or  by  implication,  just  what  was  given  synthetic- 
ally by  the  intuition  of  the  reason." 

Now,  as  we  were  taught  that  the  character  of  the 
conception  depends  on  the  character  of  the  man, 
and  that  it  is  never  the  same  in  any  age  or  in  any  two 
men,  whose  conception  has  Mr,  Parker  analyzed  ? 
And  if  he  finds  this  result  in  one  case,  according 
to  his  own  authority,  he  will  certainly  find  a  dif- 
ferent one  in  every  other  case.  And  as  concep- 
tions have  an  objective  origin,  how  can  an  analysis 
of  a  conception  give  an  intuition  as  its  result  ? 

But  this  is  not  all  that  Mr.  Parker  has  to  teacb 


20     Parker's  theological  philosophy. 

his  hearers  on  the  subject  of  the  divine  nature  and 
the  divine  character.  Such  vagaries  as  the  follovsr- 
ing  occur  farther  on  in  the  same  volume  : 

Page  151.  "  God  can  not  be  personal  and  con- 
scious as  Joseph  and  Peter,  and  yet  impersonal  and 
unconscious  as  moss,"  etc. 

Page  159.     "  God  is  the  substantiality  of  matter  I" 
Page  170.     "  God  is  the  materiality  of  matter." 
Page  156.     "  God  is  universal  being." 
This  is  pantheism  run  mad.     If  God  is  substan- 
tial, and  material,  and  universal  being,  he  must  be 
developed  into  all  specialities,  such  as  doves  and 
snakes,  eagles  and  alligators,  porcupines  and  pump- 
kins. 

Again,  page  149.  "  God  is  infinite  motherli- 
ness,"  and  "  is  immanent  in  all  things." 

Page  163.  "  The  things  of  nature  reflect  his 
image,  and  make  real  the  conceptions^  Yet  the  con- 
ception, we  are  told,  is  of  the  most  various  and 
evanescent  character. 

On  page  377,  we  are  told  that  '^  we  can  only 
know  God  through  self;"  but,  strange  to  say,  the 
contrary  of  tLis  is  likewise  true,  for  on  page  392 
we  arc  informed  that  "  there  is  nothing  but  self 
between  us  and  God." 

Even  these  are  not  the  worst  passages  as  speci- 


PARKER'S    THEOLOGICAL    PHILOSOPHY.      21 

mens  of  Parkerism.  There  are  otliers  in  wliicli 
transcendental  verbiage  becomes  worse  than  ridicu- 
lous. As  that  on  page  140,  where  it  is  written, 
"  Nature,  which  is  the  outness  of  God,  favors  re- 
ligion, which  is  the  inness  of  man ;  and  so  God  works 
with  us.     Heathens  knew  it  many  centuries  ago." 

Now,  we  affirm  that  this  is  not  true,  and  we  pos- 
tulate its  antagonism  thus :  "  Theodore  Parker, 
who  is  the  upness  of  materialism,  favors  diluted 
moonshine,  which  is  the  inness  of  transcendental- 
ism ;  thus  mental  charlatanism  works  with  us,  and 
men  of  discernment  knew  it  years  ago." 

In  all  the  attributes  of  nonsense,  the  first  para- 
graph is  more  than  a  match  for  the  second  one.  I 
am  almost  ashamed  to  put  such  rhodomontade 
upon  paper,  but  I  am  more  ashamed  of  my  coun- 
trymen, who  hear  and  laud  it. 

There  are,  likewise,  in  this  book  evidences  of 
malignity  toward  the  sacred  writel's  and  the  ortho- 
dox faith,  which  I  am  sorry  to  see,  and  which  give 
a  darker  hue  to  its  spirit  than  that  given  by  con- 
ceited or  erratic  intellect.  On  page  275  Mr.  Par- 
ker speaks  of  the  Evangelists  as  "  dull  evangelists,^^ 
who  may  have  thrust  their  own  fancies  into  the 
mouth  of  Jesus ;  and  on  page  277  he  says  Christ 
did  not  call  Peter  "  a  false  liar,  as  he  was^ 


22    Parker's  theological  philosophy. 

Now  that  a  man  can  write  in  this  way  concern- 
ing those  whom  Jesus  called  as  his  friends  and 
disciples,  and  commissioned  to  be  the  founders  of 
the  Christian  Church,  and  concerning  one  who 
willingly  atoned  for  an  error  by  penitence  and 
martyrdom,  is  an  indication  of  malignity  so  dis- 
tinct that  it  is  painful.  It  may  not  seem  so  to  Mr. 
Parker,  but  it  will  seem  so  to  every  one  who  is  in 
sympathy  with  the  spirit  and  principles  of  Christ 
and  his  apostles.  It  may  be  said  that  Christ  spoke 
of  Peter  as  a  tempter,  and  admonished  him  of  his 
errors.  But  the  language  of  admonition  and  re- 
buke serves  a  purpose.  The  language  of  malignity, 
when  no  good  end  can  be  subserved  by  it,  is  a 
different  thing. 

I  have  written  these  paragraphs  to  establish  a 
principle.  I  have  used  Mr.  Parker's  name  and  his 
book,  rather  as  the  representatives  of  a  class.  If 
Mr.  Parker  would  accept  revelation  as  a  guide  to 
his  reason,  and  the  example  and  spirit  of  Christ  as 
model  and  impulse  in  the  achievement  of  all  real 
good  for  humanity,  he  would  be  a  wiser  and  a 
better  man.  The  man  who  rejects  these,  and  yet 
professes  to  teach  of  God  and  duty,  is  necessarily  a 

BLIND  leader  of  the  BLIND. 


LETTER   II. 

YARIATIONS  AND   INCONaRUITIES. 

My  Deae  Sir  : — 

How  is  it  that  sucli  men  as  you  tolerate  dog- 
matic assertion  and  crude  philosopliisms  in  such 
writers  as  Carljle,  Emerson,  and  Parker,  while  on 
the  same  subject  you  require  in  others  mature  and 
accurate  thought  ?  It  is  possible  that  in  relation  to 
some  things  the  teachings  of  Christ  may  not  be  fully 
nor  clearly  apprehended,  even  by  those  who  receive 
and  obey  his  instruction ;  thoughtfully  to  examine 
those  teachings  is  therefore  lawful  and  proper.  If 
there  be  objections  to  the  views  of  Christians,  let 
them  be  distinctly  and  fairly  stated,  and  upright 
minds  will  hear  and  weigh  the  reasons  alleged  by 
objectors.  If  men  have  a  better  system  to  propound, 
let  them  show  it,  and  old  errors  will  vanish  in  the 
light  of  a  newly-developed  truth.  Let  those  who 
do  not  discriminate  between  good  sense  and  pom- 
pous pretense  stand  agape  in  the  presence  of  theo- 
logical bravado  and  assertion ;  but  will  you,  and  the 


24      VAEIATIONS    AND    INCONGRUITIES. 

intelligent  class  of  men  to  whicli  you  belong,  accept 
crude  dicta  from  any  man,  on  a  subject  of  serious 
moment,  and  accept  it,  as  I  am  sorry  to  believe, 
■with  little  or  no  examination. 

We  do  not  design,  in  thus  writing,  to  disparage  the 
conceded  ability  of  the  authors  to  whom  we  have 
alluded.  In  some  respects  they  are  learned  and  able 
men ;  and  Mr.  Parker,  esj)ecially,  seems  to  me  to  be 
sincerely  engaged  in  some  of  the  reform  efforts  of 
our  time.  But  any  mind — even  that  of  Laplace  or 
Bishop  Butler — were  it  afloat  on  the  sea  of  skeptical 
conjecture,  without  the  pole-star  by  which  reason 
might  direct  her  course,  would  become  perplexed, 
and  would  perplex  others,  by  its  erratic  wanderings 
on  a  starless  sea. 

Notice,  with  me,  whether  there  be  any  evidence 
of  crude  and  contradictory  thought  in  the  teachings 
of  the  popular  skeptic  already  named : — 

Mr.  Parker  affirms  that  "  Christianity  is  the  ab- 
solute religion,"  and  that  Jesus  taught  absolute  re- 
ligion to  men.  Now,  this  is  obviously  true,  and 
when  rightly  considered,  it  is  absolute  evidence,  not 
only  of  the  divine  origin,  but  of  the  divine  nature 
of  Christianity.  Christianity  teaches  absolute  obe- 
dience to  God.  It  reveals  infinite  love  in  Christ. 
Love  can  reach  an  expression  no  higher  than  is  given 


VARIATIONS    AND    INCONGRUITIES.       25 

in  the  crucifixion.  It  is  in  Christ  stronger  than  death 
• — hence  it  is  absolute.  The  Fatherhood  of  God — 
the  brotherhood  of  men  are  taught  in  ultimate  and 
absolute  terms.  Filial  obedience  becomes  absolute 
when  we  love  God  with  all  our  heart ;  and  righteous- 
ness is  absolute  when  we  love  our  neighbor  as  ourself. 
There  can  be  nothing  different — nothing  better — 
nothing  further  in  morals  and  piety  than  the  example 
and  teachings  of  Christ :  hence  Christianity,  as  ex- 
pressed by  the  life  and  teachings  of  Jesus,  is  absolute 
and  ultimate  religion. 

We  may  affirm  that  Christianity  is  absolute  in 
another  sense.  It  is  perfectly  and  alone  adapted  to 
promote  the  highest  good  of  men.  If  received  and 
obeyed  in  the  spirit  of  its  Author,  it  combines  as 
much  of  happiness  and  active  usefulness  in  the  life 
of  its  recipient  as  his  constitution  will  permit. 

Let  it  be  allowed,  then,  in  the  accepted  sense,  that 
Jesus  taught  the  absolute  religion.  In  this  the  true 
Christian  rejoices.  This  Mr.  Parker  afiirms ;  but 
yet,  as  we  shall  see,  he  makes  his  own  statement 
both  nugatory  and  ridiculous. 

Mr.  Parker  says,  in  the  beginning  of  his  book, 
p.  18,  that  "  the  religious  sentiment  does  not  itself  dis- 
close the  character,  and  still  less  the  nature  and  es- 
sence, of  the  object  on  which  it  depends." 

2 


26       VARIATIONS    AND    INCONGRUITIES. 

Again,  p.  27 — "The  sentiment  of  God,  tliougli 
vague  and  mysterious,  is  always  the  same  in  it- 
self." 

Further,  on  p.  226,  we  are  told  that  "  Christian- 
ity can  be  no  greater  than  the  religious  sentiment, 
though  it  may  be  less." 

The  absolute  religion  of  Mr.  Parker,  then,  is  no 
greater  than  a  vague  sentiment,  that  does  not  itself 
disclose  the  character  of  God — ■"  and  it  may  be  less." 
Yerily,  Mr.  P.'s  disciples  are  in  the  way  of  getting 
a  queer  idea  of  "the  absolute  religion"  taught  by 
Jesus. 

But  furthermore,  there  is  not  only  one,  but  there 
are  several  judges  to  aid  in  deciding  that  "  Chris- 
tianity is  the  absolute  religion."  On  p.  22,  we  are 
informed  that  "  Christianity  is  to  be  judged  of  by 
the  religious  sentiment — by  other  forms  of  religion, 
and  by  reason."  Strange  enough,  this — a  religion 
to  be  judged  by  a  vague  sentiment  that  does  not 
give  the  character  of  God !  Christianity  does  give 
the  character  of  God.  How  shall  it  be  judged  by  a 
sentiment  that  does  not  ?  How  shall  facts  be  judged 
by  a  sentiment  1  But  Mr.  P.'s  absolute  religion  is 
not  only  to  be  judged  by  reason,  which  is  Tvell 
enough  (if  he  means  enlightened  reason),  but  it  is  to 
be  judged  by  other  religions.     We  supposed  the 


VARIATIONS    AND    INCONGRUITIES.      27 

absolute  was  tlie  judge  of  all  else ;  but  Mr.  P.  makes 
all  else  judge  the  absolute. 

We  are  told,  on  p.  269,  of  a  peculiarity  of  the  ab- 
solute religion  whicli  Mr.  P.  teacbes,  and  tells  bis 
readers  Jesus  of  Nazareth  taught.     He  says  : 

"  It  is  not  a  system  of  theological  or  moral  doc- 
tiines,  but  a  method  of  religion  and  life.  It  lays 
down  no  positive  creed  to  he  helieved  in — -commands  no 
positive  action  to  he  done.  It  would  make  man  per- 
fectly obedient  to  Grod,  leaving  his  thoughts  and 
actions  for  reason  and  conscience  to  govern." 

We  have,  then,  an  absolute  Christianity  which  is 
a  method  without  theological  or  moral  doctrines. 
What  does  Mr.  P.  intend  to  do  with  his  theological 
doctrine  of  the  religious  sentiment?  He  tells  us, 
too,  at  the  close  of  his  book,  that  he  wants  "  real 
Christianity — the  absolute  religion — preached  with 
faith,  and  applied  to  life."  Faith  in  what?  A  doc- 
trine is  a  rule  of  faith  and  practice  ;  but  if  "  Chris- 
tianity has  neither  theological  or  moral  doctrine"  in 
it,  and  requires  neither  faith  nor  practice,  how  can 
it  be  preached  with  faith? — ^how  applied  to  life? 
Does  not  Mr.  P.  mean  a  transcendental  rather  than 
an  absolute  religion.  We  think  this  must  be  so,  as 
the  same  author  teaches  in  another  volume  (Ten 


28       VARIATIONS    AND    INCONGRUITIES. 

Sermons,  p.  12),  that  a  man  may  be  religious  and 
not  know  it. 

Mr.  P.  tells  us  that  liis  absolute  religion  is  a 
"  method  of  life  according  to  conscience  and  reason." 
But  a  man's  conscience  is  as  his  faith ;  and  we  are 
told  that  the  absolute  religion  of  Mr.  Parker  pre- 
scribes no  creed  to  be  believed.  The  method,  then, 
must  be  very  various ;  and  it  can  not  be  a  method 
of  any  particular  value,  for  our  philosopher  tells  us, 
in  another  place  (p.  104),  that  ''  many  a  savage — his 
hands  smeared  all  over  with  human  sacrifices — shall 
come  from  the  east  and  the  west,  and  sit  down  in 
the  kingdom  of  God,  with  Moses  and  Zoroaster, 
with  Socrates  and  Jesus."  The  worst  method  in 
the  world,  then,  will  answer  the  same  end  as  Mr. 
Parker's  Christian  method.  And  then  Mr.  Parker 
tells  us,  that  method  is  all  there  is  of  Christianity  I 
0  transcendentalism ! 

Mr.  Parker's  "  absolute  Christianity,"  then,  is  a 
religion  no  greater,  but  which  may  be  less,  than  a 
vague  religious  sentiment.  It  offers  nothing  to  be 
believed.  It  commands  nothing  to  be  done.  It  is 
a  method  of  life ;  but  any  other  method — even  a 
human  sacrifice — will  answer  the  same  end  ! 

There  are  other  definitions  of  "  absolute  Christi- 
anity," some  of  which  are  better  than  the  foregoing. 


VAEIATIONS    AND    INCONGEUITIES.       29 

It  would  be  wrong  to  pass  them  without  notice.  In 
one  place  we  are  told,  religion  is  ''  perfect  obedience 
to  the  law  of  God,  revealed  in  instinct^  reason,  con- 
science^ and  the  religious  sentimentj''  The  Mormons 
have  this  phase  of  the  absolute,  putting  instinct  first, 
as  Mr.  Parker  does. 

There  is  another  definition  on  page  226,  whicb 
approaches  the  circle  of  sense,  and  if  the  author 
would  admit  that  "faith  which  works  bj  love,"  his 
definition  on  this  page  might  be  accepted.  He  says, 
"  Absolute  religion  is  perfect  obedience  to  the  law 
of  God" — "perfect  love  toward  God  and  man  ex- 
hibited in  a  life  allowing  and  demanding  a  harmo- 
nious action  of  all  man's  faculties  so  far  as  thej  act 
at  all." 

This,  although  a  little  blind  as  to  its  import,  is  a 
very  difierent  thing  from  the  absolute  religion  on 
another  page,  which  proposes  nothing  to  be  be- 
lieved, and  requires  nothing  to  be  done. 

Then,  on  page  271,  we  have  something  just  the 
opposite  of  what  is  said  before.  We  are  told  that 
"Christianity  differs  from  other  religions  in  its 
emmQnXX  J  practical  character  J^  Agreed,  Mr.  Parker  ! 
Eminently  practical,  certainlj^,  if  we  take  the  life 
and  teachings  of  the  Christ  as  its  exponent.  Let  us 
forget  the  falsehood  and  folly  of  "  nothing  to  be  be- 


30       VARIATIONS    AND    INCONGRUITIES. 

lieved  and  notliing  commanded,"  and  listen  to  the 
voice  of  the  Master  calling  us  to  faith  and  duty — ■ 
"  Go  ye,  therefore,  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them 
in  the  name  of  the  FATHER,  and  of  the  SON,  and 
of  the  HOLY  GHOST— teaching  them  to  observe 
all  things  whatsoever  I  have  COMMANDED  you,  and 
lo  I  I  am  with  jou  always,  even  to  the  end  of  the 
world.     Amen." 

There,  my  dear  sir !  How  different  the  intent,  the 
thought,  and  the  spirit  of  this  commission  from  the 
theological  vagaries  over  which  we  have  passed ! 
The  doctrine  of  the  Trinity — one  name,  3^et  three 
persons  ;  men  to  be  baptized  into  that  three  persons 
in  one  name ;  taught  to  "  observe  all  things  that 
Christ  had  commanded,"  with  the  blessed  promise 
annexed  of  the  spiritual  presence  of  Jesus:  "Lo!  I 
am  with  you  always  unto  the  end  of  the  world." 

What  is  this?  Christ  a  man  like  his  disciples, 
and  yet  to  be  with  them,  everywhere  and  always, 
unto  the  end  of  the  world ! 

Pausing  and  thoughtful — your  friend  as  ever. 


LETTER    III. 

misstatements. 
My  Dear  Sir: — 

Men  wlio  are  sincere  and  interested  inquirers 
in  relation  to  religious  truth,  will  not  commit  them- 
selves to  a  guide  who,  by  any  subterfuge,  exhibits 
part  of  the  truth  as  the  whole — certainly  not  to  one 
who  makes  exaggerated  and  erroneous  statements 
in  relation  to  the  facts  in  the  case.  Honest  men 
sometimes  misrepresent  the  opinions  of  others  be- 
cause they  are  not  fnlly  informed  upon  the  subject 
of  discussion  ;  but  erroneous  statements  are  inex- 
cusable when  they  are  made  by  those  who  seek  to 
gain  an  end  by  perverting,  or  keeping  out  of  sight, 
a  correct  view  of  the  subject  which  they  are 
opposing.  This  bad  men,  who  are  political  or  re- 
ligious partisans,  will  do  ;  but  this  a  man  who  hon- 
estly seeks  to  discover  and  establish  truth  will 
not  do. 

In  the  volume  before  us  there  is   evidence  of 


82  MISSTATEMENTS. 

subterfuge  and  erroneous  affirmation.  Let  us  put 
the  best  construction  upon  the  motive,  while  we 
notice  some  palpable  instances. 

In  speaking  of  inspiration  in  the  general  sense — 
or  of  "  the  influence  of  Grod  in  nature,"  to  use  the 
language  of  the  author  (p.  212) — the  lovely,  the 
interesting — whatever  leaves  upon  the  sense  a 
pleasant  impression,  or  stirs  the  mind  with  elevat- 
ing thought,  is  grouped  into  a  picture  to  convey  an 
idea  of  God,  as  he  exhibits  himself  to  the  senses ; 
and  then  we  are  told,  "  Nature  is  religion."  But 
the  "  night  side  of  nature"  is  omitted.  It  is  indeed 
pleasant  to  ignore  foul  odors,  poison,  torture,  ma- 
lignant passion,  and  the  horrid  and  the  driveling 
in  natural  objects  ;  but  for  one  possessing  Mr.  Par- 
ker's opinions — one  who  involves  the  divine  in  the 
material — ^for  such  an  one  to  speak  of  God  in  natu- 
ral good,  while  he  omits  to  notice  in  the  same  con- 
nection natural  evil,  is  simj^ly  to  beguile  such  of  his 
hearers  as  choose  to  be  thus  beguiled;  and  such 
likewise  as  are  unable  to  discriminate  between 
rhetoric  and  reason. 

In  "  Discourses  of  Religion,"  p.  239,  Mr.  Parker 
states  that  Jesus  considered  himself  as  sent  of  God, 
but  he  adds,  "Yet  he  never  speaks  of  his  con- 
nection with  God  as  peculiar ;  never  calls  himself 


MISSTATEMENTS.  83 

the  Son  of  God  in  any  sense  wlierein  all  good  men 
are  not  also  sons  of  God," 

Now,  this  statement  is  an  absolute  misrepresenta- 
tion of  the  teaching  of  Christ.  Can  it  be  that  Mr. 
Parker  would  take  advantage  of  the  ignorance  of 
many  of  his  readers  in  relation  to  the  claims  of  the 
Redeemer  ?  Shall  we  not  rather  suppose  that  the 
writer's  zeal  to  gain  a  point  had  excluded,  for  the 
time  being,  from  his  mind  all  counter  statements  ? 

Jesus  says,  Matt.  xi.  27,  and  also  in  Luke,  "  All 
things  are  delivered  to  me  of  my  Father  ;  and  no  man 
hnoweth  who  the  Son  is,  hut  the  Father,  and  who  the 
Father  is,  hut  the  Son,  and  he  to  whom  the  Son  will 
reveal  him.''^ 

Here  the  Christ  not  only  speaks  of  himself  as 
sovereign  of  all  things,  but  he  af&rms  that  no  one 
knows  who  or  what  he  is,  but  the  Father ;  and 
further,  that  no  man  knows  the  Father  but  the 
Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  will  reveal 
him. 

Notice,  Christ,  as  the  Son,  is  the  revealer  of  the 

Father.     And  without  the  revelation  which  Christ 

makes,   no   man   knows  who   God  the    Father  is. 

And   notice,    especially,  that   he   declares   his   own 

nature  to  he  still  more  unknown  to  men  than  that  of 

the  Father.     The  Father  only  knows  the  Son,  but 

2* 


84  MISSTATEMENTS. 

it  is  not  said  the  Father  reveals  the  Son.  The 
Son  only  knows  the  Father,  but  it  is  said  the  Son 
reveals  the  Father.  The  union  of  God  with  hu- 
manity in  Christ  is  a  mystery,  as  it  respects  the 
nature  of  that  union. 

Instead,  therefore,  of  its  being  true  that  Christ 
never  s|)eaks  of  himself  as  holding  a  peculiar  con- 
nection with  the  Father,  differing  from  that  of 
other  good  men,  he  affirms  the  awakening  truths 
that  the  Father  alone  knows  the  Son,  and  that  the 
Son  alone  knows  the  Father ;  and  that  he  is  the 
only  revealer  of  the  Father  to  men. 

Now,  my  dear  sir,  what  shall  we  think  of  our 
countrymen  who  assail  the  divine  in  Christianity 
under  the  guidance  of  a  champion  who  makes  such 
palpable  misstatements  in  regard  to  one  of  the  most 
vital  points  involved  in  the  subject  of  inquiry  ? 

To  the  foregoing  might  be  added  many  passages 
from  the  book  of  John,  which  I  am  just  informed 
this  author  has  recently  concluded  does  not  belong 
to  the  Apostolic  age.  Matthew  and  Luke,  how- 
ever, are  yet,  I  presume,  considered  evangelists, 
although  Mr.  Parker  speaks  of  them  as  being 
"  dull,"  and  often  mistaken. 

There  are  flippant  and  false  charges  against  the 
orthodox  religion  in  this  volume.      In  the  Intro- 


MISSTATEMENTS.  35 

duction  it  is  written,  "  The  popular  religion  is  hos- 
tile to  man  ;  tells  us  he  is  an  outcast ;  not  a  -child 
of  God  ;  but  a  spurious  issue  of  the  devil."  Now 
it  was  Jesus  who  said,  "  Ye  are  of  your  father  the 
devil,  and  the  lusts  of  your  father  ye  will  do" 
(John,  viii.  44).  In  the  sense  in  which  Jesus  ut- 
tered these  words  the  statement  is  true,  and  the 
popular  religion  never  makes  the  statement  in  any 
other  sense. 

The  tenor  of  the  gospel,  as  taught  by  all  evan- 
gelical preachers,  is  just  the  opposite  of  what  Mr. 
Parker  would  convey  by  these  words.  While  it 
teaches  that  all  men  are  the  servants  of  sin,  and  not 
characteristically  children  of  God,  yet  this  is  made 
the  very  basis  of  mercy.  God,  in  the  person  of  his 
Son,  speaks  to  the  offenders — offers  pardon — en- 
lightens the  mind  by  truth — does  not  impute  sin 
where  there  is  no  light — and  with  the  light  there  is 
revealed  a  love  that  is  stronger  than  death,  in  or- 
der to  subdue  the  heart  to  the  rule  of  duty.  And 
then  eternal  life  is  promised  to  all  who,  being  en- 
lightened, will  repent  from  sin,  and  love  God  in 
Christ,  and  thus  be  induced  to  labor  for  the  good 
of  men."  (See  "  God  Kevealed  in  Creation  and  in 
Christ,"  p.  299,  etc.)  This  is  the  teaching  of  the 
gospel,  according  to  the  popular  religion,  and  yet 


36  MISSTATEMENTS. 

our  author  tells  liis  readers  tliat  this  religion  is  hos- 
tile to  mau !  They  manifest  hostility  to  man  who 
labor  to  turn  away  his  mind  from  this  religion. 
We  hope  such  may  be  forgiven.  "  They  know  not 
what  they  do." 

It  would  be  utterly  impracticable  to  go  through 
the  "book  and  mark  all  the  passages  which  offend 
against  truth  and  fairness,  in  a  manner  similar  to 
those  noted  above.  Mr.  Parker  is  adroit  in  weav- 
ing into  the  same  jDassage — often  into  the  same 
paragraph — a  mixture  of  truth  and  error.  Some- 
times one  predominates,  and  sometimes  the  other. 
In  relation  to  the  life  and  death  of  Christ,  he  writes 
plainly.  After  affi.rming  that  the  party  he  repre- 
sents "  calls  God  Father,  not  King,"  and  "  Eeligion 
nature,"  with  various  other  expressions  equally 
right  and  wrong,  hes  ays — ^^  Jesus  lived  for  himself, 
died  for  himself  worked  out  his  own  salvation,  and 
we  must  do  the  same,  for  one  man  can  not  live  for 
another  any  more  than  he  can  eat  or  sleep  for  him." 

This  sort  of  guileful  sophistr}^,  to  give  it  no 
worse  name,  is  prevalent  throughout  the  book. 
"  One  man  can  not  live  for  another  any  more  than 
he  can  eat  or  sleep  for  him  !"  Suppose  I  should 
say,  one  man  can  not  succor  or  instruct  another 
any  more  than  he  can  breathe  for  him !     Can  not 


MISSTATEMENTS.  37 

men  of  sense  see  tbe  fallacy  of  such  statements  ? 
To  eat  and  sleep  are  the  habitudes  of  the  animal 
nature,  necessary  to  the  existence  of  animal  life. 
But  do  not  parents,  in  a  moral  sense,  often  live  for 
their  children  ? — work  for  them — suffer  for  them — 
nay,  even  die  for  them  ?  One  man  can  not  eat 
for  another,  but  one  man  can  procure  food  to  sus- 
tain life  in  others  who  have  no  means  of  procuring 
it  for  themselves.  This  Mr,  Parker  Jcnows  is  the 
sense  of  the  ISTew  Testament.  And  shall  one 
earthly  friend  suffer  and  even  die  for  another, 
while  our  Divine  Friend  and  Father  will  not  mani- 
fest so  much  love  for  his  earthly  children  ? 

It  is  said  that  a  Scotchman,  whose  wife,  for  some 
offense  against  the  laws,  was  sentenced  to  undergo 
certain  penal  labors — labors  more  than  he  supposed 
her  little  strength  could  endure — obtained  the  re- 
lease of  his  wife  by  discharging  the  penalty  which 
was  to  be  inflicted  on  her.  Did  he  not  live  for 
her — bear  her  burden  ?  And  would  not  his  wife 
abhor  the  offense  ever  afterward  which  brought  the 
evil  on  her  husband  ? — a  husband  now  rendered 
surpassingly  dear  to  her  by  the  manifestation  of  his 
love  ;  and  would  she  not  avoid  a  repetition  of  the 
offense,  and  love  him  with  the  love  of  devotion  and 
gratitude  to  the  end  of  her  days  ? 


38  MISSTATEMENTS. 

As  human  nature  is  constitued  by  its  Maker, 
this  would  be  the  effect  upon  the  human  heart 
of  such  acts  of  self-denial  for  the  benefit  of  the 
guiltj.  And  the  very  nature  of  love,  of  goodness, 
of  mercy,  is  to  impart  of  our  means,  our  efforts, 
and  even  of  our  blood,  if  need  be,  for  the  good  of 
our  fellow-men.  Love  is  absolute.  It  is  one.  It 
must  be  the  same  in  kind  in  -God  as  in  man.  It  is 
one  in  all  moral  beings.  Holy  minds  find  their 
life  and  happiness  in  the  labor  and  self-denial  which 
love  prompts  for  the  good  of  others.  Is  not  God 
benevolent  ?  If  he  is,  then  love  begets  love ;  and 
hence  an  exhibition  of  self-denying  love  for  men 
would  aid  and  bless  all  who  would  believe.  Mani- 
fested love  reconciles  enemies.  Would  not  God 
manifest  his  love  to  the  disobedient?  "Would  he 
himself  act  according  to  laws  which  himself  has 
constituted?  If  Christ's  sacrifice  was  not  an  ex- 
hibition of  divine  Ipve,  then  God  is  not  so  benevo- 
lent as  he  requires  man  to  be.  Has  heaven  mani- 
fested no  benevolence  to  earth  ?  Not  if  Mr. 
Parker's  statement  be  true.  If  "  Ghrist  lived  for 
himself  and  died  for  himself  ^^  there  is  benevolence 
on  earth,  but  not  in  heaven. 

"Christ  died  for  Himself,"  says  Mr.  Parker. 
Did  he?     Then   he  did  what  he  did   not   intend 


MISSTATEMENTS.  89 

to  do.  He  says,  in  Matthew,  xx.  28,  "  The  son  of 
man  came  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to  minis- 
ter ;  and  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  manyy  So 
believers  and  confessors  have  ever  understood  and 
felt  in  relation  to  Christ's  death.  "  He  gave 
himself  a  ransom  for  all  to  be  testified  [made 
known  to  all]  in  due  time."  "  He  worked  out  his 
own  salvation,"  says  Mr.  Parker.  Did  he  ?  Then 
he  did  what  he  did  not  mean  to  do.  He  affirms 
that  "for  your  sakes  I  sanctify  myself,  that  you 
may  be  sanctified  through  me."  He  said  he 
should  "  be  lifted  up,  that  whosoever  belie veth  on 
him  might  not  perish,  but  have  everlasting  life." 
"  The  good  shepherd  giveth  his  life  for  the  sheep T 

Here,  my  dear  sir,  I  leave  this  portion  of  the 
book  which  you  commended  to  my  notice.  Its 
teachings  I  pronounce  to  be  untrue  to  Scripture, 
and  often  false  to  reason.  Its  style  is  sinister  and 
pretentious.  Its  teachings  are  as  unlike  the  Chris- 
tianity of  the  New  Testament  as  your  beau- 
tiful garden  is  unlike  the  tangled  morass  where 
grow  some  wild-flowers,  but  flowers  enveloped  in 
impure  vapor.  The  flowers  are  those  aspects  of  re- 
form and  humanity  for  which  we  respect  the  au- 
thor— the  vapors  are  the  prevalence  of  wrong  and 
hurtful  thought,  which  we  deplore. 


40  MISSTATEMENTS. 

At  some  time  not  far  in  the  future  I  shall  notice 
some  other  things  in  this  work,  and  endeavor  to 
give  you  my  views  of  the  reasonableness  of  some 
of  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  Christianity — es- 
pecially of  those  doctrines  which  are  rejected  by 
the  prevailing  skepticism  of  our  times. 

Yours  truly. 


LETTER    IV. 

DIVINE    PERSONALITY. 

Mr  Dear  Sir  : — 

The  skepticism  of  our  times,  like  its  talented 
preachers,  is  popular  in  many  circles  of  well-informed 
people.  I  call  it  skepticism^  because,  while  it  assails 
the  generally-received  faith  of  evangelical  Christians, 
it  offers  no  comprehensible  system  instead  of  the 
faith  it  labors  to  destroy.  It  begets  doubt,  but  it 
produces  no  conviction  that  is  influential  upon  the 
heart  and  will  of  men.  It  is,  therefore,  skepticism  ; 
and  if  the  Christian  religion,  in  its  evangehcal 
interpretation,  be  of  any  value,  it  is  hurtful  skep- 
ticism. 

It  is  popular  in  some  instances,  because  it  assumes 
the  attitude  of  reform,  and  therefore  commends  it- 
self to  minds  of  humane  and  progressive  tendencies. 
It  is  popular  in  a  wider  sense  with  many  who  desire 
to  retain  the  name  of  Christian  while  they  refuse 
obedience  to  Christ.  In  the  name  of  Jesus  it  denies 
the  divine  authority  of  Christianity ;  whether  a  man 


42  DIVINE    PERSONALITY. 

receive  or  reject  the  gospel,  be  is  a  Christian :  he 
that  bclieveth  shall  be  saved,  and  he  that  believeth 
not  shall  be  saved.  Such  a  svstem  has  the  elements 
of  popularity  with  all  sorts  of  men,  exce23t  those 
who  maintain  the  Scripture  doctrine,  that  repentance 
and  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  are  conditions  of 
lioliness  and  eternal  life. 

But  does  this  modern  phase  of  skepticism  com- 
mend itself  to  tlie  reason  of  fair-minded  men? 
Should  the  doubts  which  it  encourages  concerning 
the  foundational  truths  of  revealed  religion  be  en- 
tertained ?  .  Let  us  put  into  the  balance  of  reason 
some  of  its  utterances,  and  weigh  them  against  the 
doctrines  of  the  Christian  faith. 

You  will,  doubtless,  have  noticed,  that  while  the 
writers  of  the  Carljle  school,  sucb  as  Emerson 
and  Parker,  adopt  language  which,  speaks  of  God  as 
a  personal  being,  they  likewise  write  many  passages 
which  make  the  impression  that  there  is  no  per- 
sonal God ;  or  none  that  can  be  called  personal  in 
any  comjorehensible  sense.  On  this,  as  on  other 
subjects  of  the  most  grave  interest,  one  may  find  on 
one  page  of  Mr.  Parker's  book  a  distinct  recognition 
of  truth,  while  in  another  place  the  same  truth  is 
perplexed  by  doubt,  nullified  by  contradictory  ex- 
pressions, or  rendered  incomprehensible  by  words 


DIVINE    PERSONALITY.  43 

as  innocent  of  any  particular  import  as  moonsliine 
is  of  caloric. 

We  have  noticed,  in  a  preceding  letter,  the  pecu- 
liar philosophy  in  relation  to  the  "idea,"  ''senti- 
ment," and  "conception"  of  God.  Now,  if  any  of 
Mr.  P.'s  disciples  suppose  that  by  this  teaching  they 
know  any  thing  about  God  as  a  personal  being, 
there  are  several  passages  that  will  correct  that  mis- 
take at  once.  It  had  been  said  that  all  men  have 
an  idea  of  God ;  but,  according  to  other  passages, 
if  any  one  believes  that  he  knows  any  thing  about 
God,  either  as  a  personal  or  a  conscious  divine  being 
■ — or  that  he  has  any  comprehensible  "idea"  what- 
ever on  this  subject,  it  is  all  a  mistake.  Notice  this 
in  the  following  passage : 

"  We  talk  of  a  personal  God.  If  thereby  we  only 
deny  that  he  has  the  limitations  of  unconscious  mat- 
ter, no  harm  is  done.  But  our  conception  of  per- 
sonality is  that  of  finite  personality,  limited  by 
human  imperfections — hemmed  in  by  time  and 
space — restricted  by  partial  emotions — displeasure 
— wrath — ignorance — caprice.  Can  this  be  said  of 
God  ?  If  matter  were  conscious,  as  Locke  thinks  (?) 
it  possible,  it  must  predicate  materiality  of  God,  as 
persons  predicate  personality.  If  it  mean  God  has 
not  the  limitations  of  our  personality,  it  is  well.   But 


44  DIVINE    PEllSONALITY. 

if  it  mean  ttat  he  has  those  of  Tinconscious  matter, 
it  is  worse  than  the  other  term.  Can  God  he  per- 
sonal and  conscious  as  Joseph  and  Peter — unconscious 
and  impersonal  as  a  moss  or  the  celestial  ether?  No 
man  will  say  it.  "Where,  theu,  is  the  philosophic 
value  of  such  terms?" — p.  151. 

Now,  we  affirm  that  this  is  not  only  directly  con- 
tradictory to  what  was  said  before,  but  that  there  is 
neither  philosophy  nor  sense  in  it. 

Mr.  Parker,  as  we  have  seen,  analyzes  the  con- 
ception which  he  says  men  form  of  God,  and  finds 
in  it  "  power,  wisdom,  and  love,"  ivithout  limitation. 
Now,  if  the  idea  of  personality  in  God  must  be  lim- 
ited by  human  imperfection,  why  not  wisdom  and 
love  thus  limited  ?  There  is  contradiction  in  affirm- 
ing the  one  and  denying  the  other.  So  that,  if  Mr. 
P.  affirms  that  God  is  not  personal  in  any  compre- 
hensible sense,  then  he  must  affirm,  according  to  his 
own  showing,  that  God  is  neither  wise  nor  unwise, 
good  nor  evil,  in  any  comprehensible  sense.  To 
affirm  personality  of  God  as  an  infinite  being  is,  as 
we  shall  see,  more  rational  than  to  affirm  wisdom  or 
love  of  him,  because  the  human  idea  of  moral  char- 
acter^ without  revelation,  is  imperfect ;  but  the  idea 
of  personal  identity  is  absolute,  and  always  the  same 
in  all  beings. 


DIVINE    PEKSONALITY.  45 

There  are  some  things  wliicli  are  the  same  in 
themselves,  and  the  same  forever.  Truth  must  be 
the  same  to  all  intelligent  beings,  so  far  as  known 
to  them.  Two  and  three  are  five  with  God  as  they 
are  with  Joseph  and  Peter.  Self-consciousness  can 
not  be  one  thing  in  God  and  another  thing  in  man. 
The  absolute  truths  of  the  universe,  when  known, 
must  be  the  same  to  all  beings  that  have  a  moral 
nature,  or  else  the  moral  universe  is  founded  on  the 
principle  of  discord.  Personality  is  an  absolute 
truth — it  is  an  intuition.  We  conceive  of  it  in  God 
as  distinctly  as  we  perceive  it  in  ourselves. 

Mr.  Parker's  reasons,  annexed  to  the  above  par- 
agraph, are  about  equal  to  the  reasons  annexed  to 
his  statements  on  some  other  subjects.  So  far  as 
there  is  any  reason,  in  the  matter,  the  author's  idea 
is,  that  because  God  can  not  be  affirmed  to  be  im- 
personal and  unconscious  as  the  moss  and  the  ce- 
lestial ether,  therefore  he  is  not  personal  nor  con- 
scious. If  the  argument  were  good  for  any  thing — 
judging  of  the  cause  from  the  effect — then,  as  two 
opposite  characteristics  are  instanced  in  the  objects 
named,  instead  of  proving  that  God  is  neither  con- 
scious nor  unconscious,  personal  nor  impersonal,  it 
would  prove  that  he  is  both  the  one  and  the  other. 
The  foregoing  passage  is  written  in  the  phrase  of 


46  DIVINE    PERSONALITY. 

blank  pantlicism;  and  yet  Mr.  Parker,  in  otker 
places,  denies  the  doctrine. 

Furthermore,  it  is  admitted  by  the  writer  that 
man  is  a  personal  and  conscious  being,  and  that 
matter  is  not  personal  or  conscious.  It  is  conceded 
that  personal  agents  and  impersonal  objects  do  exist. 
To  deny  this  would  be  to  deny  the  validity  of  both 
sense  and  reason.  Now,  if  it  be  a  fact  that  personal 
and  conscious  agents  do  exist,  separate  from  imper- 
sonal and  unconscious  objects,  why  may  not  God 
exist  as  a  proper  personal  and  conscious  being,  sep- 
arate from  and  ruling  over  the  kingdoms  of  nature? 
Is  man  a  personal  and  conscious  being,  while  God 
has  a  mixed  identity — conscious  and  unconscious  at 
the  same  time !  To  argue  that  because  one  man  is 
white  and  another  is  black,  therefore  George  Wash- 
ington could  be  neither  a  white  man  nor  a  black 
man,  would  be  a  conclusion  as  rational  as  that  of 
Mr.  P.  when  he  utters  the  nonsense,  that  because 
personal  agents  and  impersonal  objects  both  exist, 
therefore  God  is  neither,  or  that  he  is  both. 

To  doubt  of  the  personality  of  God  and  his 
conscious  separateness  from  matter,  is  to  plunge 
the  human  reason  back  into  the  blindness  of  an 
atheistic  philosophy.  The  wisdom  of  the  ancients, 
of  which  Plato  is  the  highest  exponent,  after  ages 


DIVINE    PERSONALITY.  47 

of  discussion,  reached  tlie  conclusion  that  plan  was 
before  organization — a  designer  before  a  construc- 
tion. And  if  there  be  such  a  thing  as  an  intuition 
(which  we  ought  to  admit,  notwithstanding  the 
word  is  sadly  abused  by  the  transcendentalists  when 
they  utter  their  o^unions  in  its  name),  this  is  one — 
the  designer  is  before  and  apart  from  the  design. 
Man  is  conscious  of  designing  and  then  of  moulding 
the  unconscious  matter  into  the  forms  of  the  mental 
archetype.  We  are  so  made,  that  it  is  not  possi- 
ble for  any  one  to  perceive  clearly  the  marks  of 
design  in  any  object  without  the  accompanying 
conviction  that  plan  was  before  the  construction. 
Whether  we  call  this  conviction,  intuition,  expe- 
rience, or  a  logical  deduction,  the  result  is  still  the 
same :  common  reason  teaches  every  man,  what 
philosophy  sanctions  as  the  result  of  her  most  pro- 
found inquiries,  that  a  designing  cause  is  before 
and  apart  from  a  designed  effect.  Eeason  afl&rms 
•  design  in  nature.  To  write  skeptically,  therefore, 
concerning  the  conscious  personality  of  God,  as  Mr. 
Parker  has  done,  is  a  sin  against  reason  and  phi- 
losophy, as  well  as  against  common  sense  and  re- 
ligion. 

But  there  are  scientific  facts,  ascertained  beyond 
question,  which  should  dispel  the  vague  notions  of 


48  DIVINE    PERSONALITY. 

those  who  speak  of  God  as  the  "  materiality  of  mat- 
ter," and  as  being  "  inseparable  from  nature."  An 
extract  from  "  God  Kevealed  in  the  Process  of 
Creation,  and  by  the  Manifestation  of  Christ,"  will, 
I  think,  show  that  the  idea  of  a  God  who  is  nei- 
ther conscious  nor  unconscious,  in  the  common  ac- 
ceptation of  language,  is  no  more  in  consonance 
with  the  facts  of  science  than  it  is  with  the  deduc- 
tions of  right  reason. 

The  "Natural  Development"  theory — which  ar- 
gues that  nature  has  been  advanced  from  lower  to 
higher  species,  by  some  law  or  power  which  is  in- 
separable from  the  material  universe,  and  which 
has  developed  itself  from  inanimate  matter  up 
through  an  ascending  series  from  the  lowest  to  the 
highest  genera  of  things — issues  itself  in  an  utter 
absurdity.  "  God  is  inseparable  from  nature,"  says 
the  author  of  the  "  Yestiges."  To  this  agree 
Compt^  and  probably  such  philosophers  as  Nott, 
Gliddon,  and  multitudes  of  others,  like  Mr,  Parker, 
who  know  little  or  nothing  of  the  scientific  basis  of 
the  argument. 

Let  us  notice  some  legitimate  results  of  this 
theory.  The  whole  subject  is  discussed  at  length 
in  the  volume  referred  to.  The  following  is  a  pas- 
sage from  chapter  viii. : 


DIVINE    PERSONALITY.  49 

"  "When  it  is  said,  '  God  can  not  be  separated 
from  nature,'  while  at  the  same  time  lie  is  affirmed 
to  be  the  '  author  and  sustainer  of  nature,'  the  im- 
port can  not  be,  according  to  this  theory,  that  God 
has  exercised  any  personal  act  of  creation  or  con- 
trol, since  gravitation  first  affected  the  material 
which  formed  our  system  ;  or,  if  the  theory  be  con- 
fined to  the  earth,  then  no  creative  act  has  been  put 
forth  by  the  Maker  since  the  first  organic  cell  was 
formed,  and  that  was  not  formed  by  a  divine  au- 
thor, but  by  law.  God  is  declared  to  be  '  nature.' 
It  is  said  he  is  inseparable  from  nature,  and  that 
nature  is  the  manifestation  of  God.  Hence,  as  a 
logical  necessity,  natural  phenomena,  organic  and 
inorganic,  manifest  all  the  God  that  belongs  to  this 
theory. 

"  If,  then,  God  be  inseparable  from  material  na- 
ture now,  he  has  been  inseparable  from  nature  in 
all  periods  of  past  progress.  Then  what  follows  ? 
Why  this :  Eeason  is  a  product  of  material  devel- 
opment; hence,  before  the  existence  of  organic 
forms,  there  was  no  reason  in  existence,  none,  at 
least,  in  any  wise  connected  with  our  planet.  In- 
telligence was  developed  from  lower  susceptibilities 
up  to  higher  instincts,  and  thence  still  up  to  the 
human  mind.     Then,  as  a  sequent  of  this  doctrine, 


50  DIVINE    PERSONALITY. 

at  early  periods  of  creative  progress  bj  law,  intelli- 
gence did  not  exist ;  and  if  God  can  not  be  sepa- 
rated from  nature,  then  before  nature  produced  in- 
telligence, there  was  no  intelligent  God.  During 
the  Saurian  Age,  the  lizard  mind  was  the  highest 
in  existence ;  and  if  there  be  nothing  above  and 
separate  from  nature,  then  the  fish-lizard-god  was, 
for  the  time,  the  supreme  being ;  or  at  least  the  su- 
premest  being  that  acted  in  connection  with  the 
earth. 

"  But,  is  it  said  that  not  only  the  laws  and  beings 
of  our  earth,  but  the  laws  and  beings  of  our  whole 
system,  or  of  the  universe,  are  included  in  the  idea 
of  'progressive  development,'  and  that,  with  this 
enlarged  conception,  God  can  not  be  separated  from 
nature  ?  Now,  admitting  the  idea  to  be  expanded, 
then,  if  God  can  not  be  separated  from  nature.  He 
is  in  different  stages  of  development  in  the  universe  at 
the  same  time.  He  is  in  different  stages  of  develop- 
ment at  the  same  time  in  our  solar  system  ;  thus, 
in  either  view,  the  idea  is  an  absurdity. 

The  legitimate  ultimatum  of  any  theory  that 
recognizes  the  law  of  progressive  development  in 
creation  as  a  power  develojiing  new  ^nd  higher 
species  out  of  lower  ones ;  and  which  affirms  at  the 
same  time  that  *  God  is  nature'  and  '  inseparable 


DIVINE    PERSONALITY.  51 

from  nature' — ^thus  placing  divine  interposition  out 
of  the  question — tlie  ultimatum  of  such  a  theory 
is,  that  as  law  has  produced  new  species  progress- 
ively from  the  mollusk  to  the  man,  so  the  future 
will  be  as  the  past ;  the  latter  product  rising  above 
previous  ones,  until  the  laws  of  nature  will  create  a 
God^  instead  of  God  creating  nature. 

"  What  a  rest  to  the  soul  is  the  rational,  philo- 
sophical, and  scriptural  view,  compared  with  such. 
atheistic  monstrosities : — matter  and  its  properties 
in  the  beginning ;  force  developed  and  laws  insti- 
tuted by  the  dispositions  of  matter ;  organic  life 
and  progress  from  lower  to  higher  forms ;  that 
progress  effected  by  the  instrumentality  of  natural 
forces  and  laws  ;  advance  by  the  destruction  of 
lower  and  the  introduction  of  higher  species  ; — the 
whole  produced,  advanced,  and  controlled  in  accord- 
ance with  a  plan  which  bears  the  impress  of  a  Su- 
preme Creator  and  Governor." 

There  are  moral  considerations  connecting  them- 
selves with  this  subject  which  add  to  the  difficulties 
of  skepticism,  while  they  accumulate  proofs  of  the 
personal  existence  ->f  the  Divine  Being. 

Reason  can  account  for  things  as  they  are,  only 
upon  one  of  three  theories. 

1.  Chance,    or  the  undetermined  succession  of 


52  DIVINE    PERSOXALITY. 

events,  in  v/liicli  notliing  is  settled,  but  every  thing 
hajopens  fortuitous! }'■  and  without  design. 

2.  An  omnipotent  fate  or  law,  sometimes  called 
necessity,  or  the  necessity  of  things,  which  causes 
and  determines  each  event  to  exist  invariably  as  it 
does  ;  and  which  must  thus  cause  all  events  in  mat- 
ter and  mind  forever. 

3.  A  supreme  intelligent  Creator  and  Lawgiver, 
who  governs  the  universe  by  laws  adapted  to  the 
nature  of  things. 

The  first  of  these  theories  needs  no  discussion. 

The  second  theory  has  been  proposed  by  skepti- 
cal inquirers  ever  since  the  birth  of  philosophy.  It 
is  still  held  in  some  form  by  atheists,  by  material- 
ists, by  those  who  believe  in  a  law-soul  of  the 
w^orld ;  and  more  recently  by  some  who  seem  to 
believe  that  the  machine  of  the  universe  being 
started,  its  own  impulse  produces  all  phenomena 
and  all  results  which  are  exhibited  in  the  worlds 
of  matter  and  of  mind. 

Supposing  this  theory  to  be  true,  what  do  we 
learn  concerning  the  moral  character  of  God,  and 
the  condition  and  prospects  of  man  ? 

If  there  be  no  personal  God,  then  Theodore*  Par- 
ker is  a  personal  creature  without  a  personal  crea- 
tor— a  child  without  a  father,  and  an  effect  without 


DIVINE    PEESONALITY.  53 

a  cause.  But  leaving  laconics  wliicli  need  explana- 
tion, it  will  not  be  denied  that  man  is  a  mortal  and 
dependent  being.  He  did  not  cause  his  own  exist- 
ence, and  he  is  liable  at  any  moment  to  suffer  det- 
riment in  mind  and  body  by  laws  or  circum- 
stances (call  them  what  you  will)  over  which  he 
has  no  control.  If  there  be  no  personal  God  wbo 
administers  a  moral  government  which,  differs  from 
the  allotments  of  nature,  then  man  is  plainly  the 
victim  of  a  power  that  is  malignant  in  its  nature. 
Call  that  power  what  you  will — the  "  substantiality 
of  matter,"  as  Parker  would  say  ;  or  the  impersonal 
nature  of  things,  as  Mirabaud  and  Compte  would 
assert.  A  personal  God  separate  from  nature  being 
ignored,  then  the  nature  of  things  is  a  power — man 
is  subject  to  that  power,  and  that  power  is  evil  per 
se,  and  evil  in  development.  If  this  blind  power 
be  called  God,  it  can  be  described  by  adding  a 
single  adjective  to  the  definition  of  Mr.  Parker^ — a 
"  God — neither  personal  nor  impersonal,  conscious 
nor  unconscious" — but  malignant. 

In  order  to  see  the  ground  of  this  affirmation, 
notice  in  connection  with  it  the  phenomena  of  con- 
science. 

If  all  things  occur  by  a  force  of  nature,  or  by 
any  impersonal  force  operating  through  nature,  a 


54:  DIVINE    PERSONALITY. 

man  should  suffer  no  more  for  an  evil  act  than  a 
good  one.  If  a  parent  were  to  force,  or  even  influ- 
ence his  child  to  do  a  certain  action,  and  then  pun- 
ish him  for  doing  it,  such  a  father  would  be  a  mon- 
ster. It  has  been  replied  to  this,  that  a  man  suffers 
compunction  of  conscicDce  because  he  believes  an 
act  to  be  wrong,  and  thus  believing,  it  is  righteous- 
ness^ in  the  nature  of  things,  which  causes  him  to 
suffer  for  it.  But  evidently  this  reply  only  re- 
moves the  difficulty  one  step  further  back.  Ac- 
cording to  this  sj'stem,  a  man's  faith,  good  or  bad, 
is  produced  as  much  by  a  force  of  nature  and  cir- 
cumstance as  his  actions ;  hence,  the  compunction 
of  conscience  is  still  the  result  of  a  necessitated  an- 
tecedent. Nature,  therefore,  which  attaches  re- 
morse to  an  act  which  she  herself  produces,  either 
immediately  or  by  a  chain  of  causes,  is  just  as  ma- 
lignant as  a  parent  would  be  if  he  influenced  his 
son  to  do  a  wrong  action  and  then  punished  him 
for  doing  it.  If  man  be  a  voluntary  moral  agent, 
and  sin  a  moral  evil,  the  office  of  conscience  in  ad- 
monishing of  sin  and  denouncing  the  sinner,  is  an 
evidence  of  the  mercy  and  justice  of  God.  But  if 
man  be  not  a  personal  agent — if  God  be  not  a  per- 
sonal sovereign — the  conscience  is  a  mystery  and  a 
malignity. 


DIVINE    PERSONALITY.  55 

It  is,  moreover,  a  law  of  man's  moral  nature  that 
the  more  he  loves  evil,  and  the  more  frequently  he 
sins,  the  less  he  suffers  from  the  inflictions  of  con- 
science. If,  then,  there  be  beyond  this  law  of  na- 
ture no  God  who  is  the  moral  governor  and  judge 
of  men,  then  nature  is  evidently  malignant;  be- 
cause many  men  grow  more  selfish  and  wicked  till 
they  die,  and  the  more  evil  they  become,  the  less 
remorse  they  feel  for  sin.  Nature  thus  makes  sin 
the  way  of  life.  Despots  succeed  in  crushing  out 
light  and  liberty  by  banishing  the  master-spirits 
of  the  age,  and  shedding  rivers  of  human  blood — 
as  those  heartless  adventurers  the  Bonapartes  (and, 
I  had  almost  written,  some  of  their  biographers). 
And  yet,  thousands  of  widows  and  orphans  suffer 
thousands  of  times  more  in  consequence  of  their 
evil  acts  than  they  do  themselves.  Who  dare  say 
that  if  this  be  the  work  of  nature,  beyond  which 
there  is  no  God,  that  nature  is  not  malignant  ?  In 
charity  we  accept  some  of  Mr.  Parker's  best  defi- 
nitions as  his  prevailing  idea  of  God  ;  but  when  he 
becomes  a  materialist  with  Mirabaud,  or  a  pantheist 
or  law-soulist  with  Chambers  and  Compte,  then, 
instead  of  writing  down  his  impersonal  God  as 
knowledge,  love,  power,  he  should  write  ^ower,  law, 
malignity. 


56  DIVINE    PERSONALITY. 

But  furtlicrmore,  and  finally,  and  conclusively, 
unless  the  Maker  lias  incorporated  a  falsehood  into 
the  human  soul,  man  is  a  free,  responsible  agent, 
and  God  is  a  personal  moral  governor.  Man  is  so 
constituted,  that  he  can  not  feel  guilty  for  wrong 
unless  he  is  conscious  that  he  was  voluntarj'-  in  the 
wrong  act.  If,  therefore,  he  is  not  the  responsible 
cause  of  his  own  moral  action,  God  has  placed  a 
lying  witness  in  his  soul. 

But  look  again  at  the  irrefragible  testimony 
which  the  human  consciousness  gives  of  the  re- 
sponsibility of  man  and  the  personality  of  God. 
Man  is  actually  so  constituted,  as  a  moral  being, 
that  obedience  and  gratitude  can  be  exercised  only 
toward  a  personal  being — a  being  who  consciously 
and  voluntarily  does  us  good.  Can  man  be  grate- 
ful to  the  bread  that  satisfies  his  hunger  ?  Can  he 
obey,  as  a  responsible  being,  something  that  is  nei- 
ther personal  nor  impersonal  in  any  comprehensible 
sense  ?  The  thought  is  preposterous  !  Unless  the 
moral  nature  of  man  be  a  lie,  produced  by  malig- 
nity, there  is  a  personal  conscious  God,  in  the 
proper  and  only  import  of  those  terms,  to  obey  and 
love  whom  is  the  life  and  adaptation  of  the  human 
soul. 

Is  it  not  ridiculous,   as  well  as  preposterous,  to 


DIVINE    PERSONALITY.  67 

think  of  Mr.  Parker  expatiating  upon  the  nature 
of  God  -with  the  exhortation  to  love  and  obedience 
which  must  follow.  He  tells  his  hearers — "  God  is 
the  ground  of  nature" — "  he  is  what  is  j^ermanenf  in 
the  passing — what  is  real  in  the  apparent."  "  God 
is  the  materiality  of  matter,"  so  "he  is  the  spirit- 
uality of  spirit."  But  "he  is  neither  personal  nor 
conscious,  like  Peter  and  Joseph,  nor  impersonal 
and  unconscious,  like  the  moss  or  the  ether."  "  The 
greatest  religious  souls  can  say  with  an  old  heathen, 
'  Since  God  can  not  be  fully  declared  by  any  one 
name,  though  compounded  of  never  so  many, 
therefore  he  is  rather  to  be  called  by  every  name, 
he  being  both  one  and  all  things.'  "  Mr.  Parker 
then  adds  an  exhortation,  thus  :  "  As  I  have  always 
told  you,  my  friends,  love  and  obedience  to  God 
is  the  duty  and  happiness  of  man.  You  have 
heard  my  description  of  '  the  dear  God.'  I  enjoin 
upon  you  to  love  and  obey  The  Materiality  of 
Matter,  the  All  Things,  the  Spirituality  of  Spirit, 
the  neither  personal  nor  impersonal,  conscious  nor 
unconscious  God.  Yea,  my  hearers,  I  say  unto 
you  obey  it !  It  is  immanent  in  all  things — in 
the  blush  of  the  rose  and  in  the  bite  of  the  dog — 
in  the  breath  of  the  breeze  and  in  the  howl  of  the 
maniac.     Eemember,  too,  our  party  '  calls  religion 


58  DIVINE    PERSONALITY. 

nature'  (p.  450) — believes  '  the  divine  incarnation, 
is  in  all  mankind'  (p.  451) — '  asks  no  forgiveness 
for  sin'  (452) — therefore  "\ve  will  imitate  the  divine 
incarnation,  and  if  wc  sin  we  will  ask  no  forgive- 
ness.    Amen  and  amen." 

Now,  if  this  be  preposterous,  it  is  so  because  it 
is  an  application  of  Parkerism  in  the  light  of  com- 
mon sense.  If  auj  one  says  that  passages  are 
so  clustered  together  as  to  make  them  seem  pre- 
posterous, we  deny  the  impeachment.  Other  re- 
sults may  be  obtained  by  inferences  from  other 
passages,  but  the  above  is  a  fair  and  an  unavoid- 
able result  from  one  class  of  passages  written  in  this 
volume. 

And  beside,  there  are  single  passages  which  are 
as  preposterous  in  themselves  as  these  are  put  to- 
gether, and  not  only  in  this  volume,  but  they  are 
found  in  nearly  all  of  this  author's  writings.  In 
one  of  his  Ten  Sermons  (p.  176),  for  instance,  he 
says  of  a  fly,  "  Lo  !  here  I  am  an  individual  and 
conscious  thing,  sucking  the  bosom  of  the  world." 
This  is  certainly  hyperbole  run  mad ;  and  is  just 
about  as  ridiculous  as  though  I  should  say  of  Theo- 
dore Parker,  "  Lo !  there  he  is,  an  individual  and 
conscious  philosojohist,  sucking  transcendentalism 
from  the  great  toe  of  the — ^man  in  the  moon." 


DIVINE    PERSONALITY.  69 

SucTi  nonsense  produced  by  a  man  of  abilitj, 
capable  of  writing  sensibly  and  consistently,  is  only 
another  evidence  that  without  faith  the  mind  is  like 
a  ship  without  ballast,  driven  by  contrary  winds. 
Turn  away,  my  dear  sir,  from  such  hallucinations — 
hallucinations  that  mingle  the  evil  and  the  incon- 
gruous with  something  of  good ;  and  rejoice  with 
me  in  the  evidence,  that  above  the  laws  of  nature 
there  presides  a  supreme  personal  God,  the  parent 
and  the  president  of  the  universe. 

There  are  other  evidences  beside  those  to  which 
we  have  alluded  that  affirm  this  great  truth — evi- 
dence in  which  all  good  and  thoughtful  men  will 
rejoice  together,  although  the  doubts  and  difficul- 
ties interposed  by  skeptics  were  a  thousand-fold 
greater  than  they  are. 

God  IS  j  ust — 

Because  he  has  connected  the  monitions  and  re- 
proofs of  conscience  with  acts  known  to  be  wrong. 

Because,  if  conscience  be  not  heeded,  it  leaves 
the  transgressor  to  grow  hardened  in  evil ;  evil 
which  in  itself  is  incipient  penalty,  and  which  being 
voluntarily  persisted  in,  becomes  confirmed  in  the 
character  of  the  transgressor. 

Because  motives  to  good,  if  obeye^'  become 
more  influential ;  if  disobeyed,  less  so. 


60  DIVINE    PEllSONALITY. 

Because  fhe  moral  constitution  is  so  formed,  that 
the  more  sinful  men  become,  the  more  blind  tliey 
become,  both  to  the  evil  and  the  desert  of  sin. 

Because  evil  is  not  only  linked  "vvith  sin  here, 
but  while  it  brings  present  evil,  it  also  forms  an 
evil  character  in  the  soul,  which  secures  future 
evil. 

God  IS  good — 

Because,  to  include  much  in  one  thought,  he  has 
made  the  soul  so  that  its  best  good  consists  in  a 
life  of  love  to  God  and  to  men.  And  as  love  only 
can  beget  love,  God  becomes  immanently  personal 
in  Christ,  in  whose  sacrifice  he  reveals  his  love — 
and  thus  by  faith  the  law  of  love  is  fulfilled  in  all 
who  walk  not  after  the  flesh,  or  natural  mind,  but 
after  the  Spirit. 

Tell  me  now,  my  dear  sir,  is  not  such  evidence, 
and  the  known  practical  results  of  the  Christian 
faith,  a  satisfaction  to  the  reason  and  a  joy  to  the 
heart,  while  the  brilliant  vagaries  of  skeptical 
thinkers  are  empty  and  evil  ? 

Yours,  in  behalf  of  right  reason. 


LETTER    V. 

the  tri-ttnitt  op  the  divine  mind. 

My  Dear  Sir  : — 

At  tlie  close  of  a  former  letter  I  proposed 
to  offer,  when  leisure  would  allow,  some  reasons 
affirmatory  of  the  orthodox  faith,  with  the  design 
more  especially  to  illustrate  and  defend  some  of  the 
doctrines  which  are  controverted  or  rejected  by 
the  skeptics  of  our  times. 

In  what  I  shall  say  I  do  not  propose  to  give  a 
Scriptural  exposition  of  these  doctrines,  nor  to  pre- 
sent them  in  the  form  of  a  dogmatic  statement ;  nor 
do  I  propose  to  illustrate  or  confirm  the  symbols 
of  any  particular  denomination. 

Illustrations  are  seldom  perfectly  accurate ;  and 
reasons  which  should  be  limited  to  certain  aspects 
of  a  question,  may  be  misapplied  to  cover  the 
whole  subject.  My  design,  therefore,  will  not  be 
to  prove  the  systematic  form  of  the  doctrines  of 
which  I  shall  speak ;  but  to  show  that  the  evan- 
gelical interpretation  of  the  Scriptures,  as  generally 


62        TEI-FNITY    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIND. 

expressed  in  tlie  formularies  of  the  cburclies,  has 
illustrative  and  analogical  reasoning  on  its  side.  I 
desire  to  show  that  reason  is  with  the  evangelical 
system,  and  not  against  it ;  and  that  many  aspects 
of  vital  Christian  doctrine,  as  expressed  in  the  New 
Testament,  may  be  sustained  by  accurate  deduc- 
tion, and  illustrated  by  the  most  profound  analo- 
gies. 

The  subject  is  presented  in  this  form,  not  so 
much  for  the  edification  of  Christians,  as  to  con- 
vince gainsayers  that  reason,  so  far  as  she  utters 
her  voice,  is  icith  us,  and  against  them. 

Let  us  look  first  at  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity. 
This  doctrine  is  contained  in  the  general  expres- 
sion that  there  is  one  God,  one  name,  Jehovah,  who 
is  manifested  in  the  Scriptures  as  subsisting  in 
three  divine  persons,  the  Father,  the  Son,  the  Holy 
Ghost. 

It  is  agreed  that  the  word  person  is  used  in  dog- 
matic theology,  not  because  its  common  import  con- 
veys a  perfect  sense  of  the  doctrine  as  revealed  in 
the  New  Testament ;  but  "because  it  conveys  a 
sense,  which,  being  defined  hj  the  phrases  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, gives  an  accurate  idea.  It  is,  moreover,  the 
most  proper,  we  may  say  the  only  proper  icord,  be- 
cause the  sacred  writers  all  use  the  pronouns  which 


TEI-UNITY    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIND.        63 

the  laws  of  language  require  should  be  used  in  a 
personal  sense  in  substitution  for  Falber,  Son,  and 
Spirit.  No  other  word  in  any  language  will  gen- 
eralize the  expressions  of  the  sacred  writers.  They 
apply  the  personal  pronouns,  as  you  know,  to 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  while  yet  they  give 
to  each  of  these  the  attributes  of  the  one  name — Je- 
hovah. It  is  easy  for  men  to  declaim  against  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  but  so  long  as  they  can  not 
deny  this  usage  of  the  inspired  writers,  there  is  a 
Scriptural  basis  for  the  orthodox  interpretation. 

We  affirm,  then,  that  there  is  in  the  divine  na- 
ture a  basis  for  the  tri-personal  manifestation  of 
God,  and  that  it  is  only  by  the  manifestation  of 
God  in  three  persons  that  the  divine  nature  can  be 
efficaciously  known.* 

*  The  Andover  exposition  of  Schleiermacher,  in  the  notes  of  Pro- 
fessor Stuart,  affirms  a  basis  in  the  divine  mind  for  the  triune  mani- 
festation of  God  to  men ;  and  afQrms,  likewise,  the  adaptations  of 
this  divine  manifestation  to  the  wants  of  humanity.  "  Tri-unity,  ac- 
cording to  my  humble  apprehension,  consists  in  something  that 
belongs  to  the  Movuc  itself,  and  which  laid  the  foundations  for  the 
manifestations  of  Father  and  Son  and  Spirits — "  Who  can  refuse  to 
aclcnowledge  that  either  some  modification  or  some  property  of  the 
divine  nature,  in  respect  to  substance  or  attribute  [general  enough, 
certainly]  led  to  the  manifestation  of  the  Godhead  in  what  we  call  a 
personal  manner  ?" 

Dr.  Bushnell,  of  Hartford,  who  gives  Scbleiermacherism  blinded 
by  an  imperfect  conception,  doubts  this,  as  he  does  the  proper  hu- 
maLuity  of  Christ.     In  our  humble  opinion,  Andover  is  right  in  its 


64       TRI-UNITY    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIND. 

It  is  well  known  that  in  the  age  of  Plato,  when 
reason  readied  her  culminating  point  among  the 
ancients,  the  idea  of  the  tri-unitj  of  God  was 
strikingly  approximated.  Now,  -while  this  fact 
does  not  prove  that  the  depths  of  the  divine  can 
be  fathomed  by  the  finite  human,  we  think  it  does 
prove  that  •  the  most  profound  indications  of  the 
light  of  nature  point  in  the  direction  of  orthodox 
Christian  doctrine.* 

The  Pliilonic  exposition  is  grounded  in  the  phra- 

conception  of  the  basis  of  that  manifestation  and  of  the  person  of 
the  Redeemer,  and  Princeton  is  riglit  in  its  announcement  of  the 
one  will  in  three  persons. 

It  has  been  true  in  times  past  that  the  fear  of  the  power  which 
graceless  dogmatics  have  exercised  to  create  odium  against  reason, 
has  prevented  many  who  love  the  truth  from  conceding  tlie  value 
of  the  elder  developments  of  the  human  reason  on  this  and  kindred 
subjects  [that  of  Plato  and  Philo,  for  instance] ;  but  so  long  as  it  is 
true  that  the  Alexandrine  exposition  of  the  Logos  gives  the  -usus  lo- 
quendi  of  apostolic  times — the  man  departs  from  the  correct  laws 
of  interpretation  who  refuses  to  acknowledge  the  fact. 

*  The  seeds  of  the  philosophy  of  Philo  are  found  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, while  his  system  (if  he  reall}'  has  one)  is  developed  in  Platonic 
phraseology.  Philo  in  some  passages  undoubtedly  attributes  person- 
ality to  the  logos ;  and  it  must  be  conceded  that  the  Apostle  John 
coincides  in  conception  more  nearly  with  Philo  than  he  does  with 
some  symbolic  expressions  of  later  times — even  of  our  times. 

"We  might  speak,  too,  of  some  of  the  most  profound  thinkers 
among  the  Unitarians  who  have  intimated  in  impressive  circum- 
stances, and  in  imposing  positions,  a  desire  to  be  understood  as  ap- 
proximating the  Trinitarian  views  of  the  Godhead. — See  Channing 
and  Bancrofts  Addresses. 


TEI-UNITY    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIND.      65 

seology  of  fhe  Old  Testament — the  Platonic  in  tlie 
constitution  of  the  human  mind.  Both  of  these 
bear  the  impress  of  the  Maker's  mind,  and  hence 
analogies  derived  from  these  sources  are  founded 
in  truth.  We  do  not  affirm  that  they  are  always 
rightly  applied. 

"  The  physical  universe,"  you  say,  "  as  well  as 
the  moral,  bears  upon  its  nature  the  impress  of  the 
creator."  Certainly  it  does,  and  those  who  are  dis- 
posed to  pantheistic  notions — who  tell  their  hearers 
that  "nature  is  religion,"  and  who  find  "God  im- 
manent in  all  things" — will,  of  course,  favor  analo- 
gies from  the  nature  of  material  things  to  the  na- 
ture of  God.  But  when  you  say  that  "  a  simple 
monad  lies  at  the  origin  of  all  natural  phenomena," 
the  illustration  is  clearly  at  fault.  If  the  atomic 
philosophy  be  true,  there  is  an  infinity  of  atoms, 
and  likewise  a  diversity  in  their  qualities. 

The  elementary  principles  of  matter  may  be  sep- 
arated the  one  from  the  other,  by  chemical  pro- 
cesses, and  each  of  these,  perhaps,  has  a  molecular 
constitution ;  but  the  actual  economic  entities  of 
the  physical  world  are  mostly  tri-unities.  The  ele- 
ments of  the  phenomenal  world  were  not  created 
to  exist  in  separate  unities,  but  to  combine  in  the 
forms  in  which  matter  is  manifested  to  man.     Tlie 


Q6      TRI-UNITY    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIND. 

elementary  principles  prove  hy  their  affinities  that  they 
abhor  absolute  unity.  Some  two  elemeDts,  with, 
electricity,  the  everj-where-present  spirit  of  mat- 
ter, combine  to  form  the  character  of  material 
things,  as  manifested  to  the  human  sense.  The 
earths,  air,  water,  are  trinities,  or  rather  tri-unities. 
They  have  qualities  as  unities  and  qualities  as  tri- 
unitties.  The  elements  of  things  were  not  designed 
to  exist  alone.  They  seek  tri-unity  in  one  spirit 
by  their  inherent  afOinities.  And  in  tri-unity  alone 
is  nature  practically  adapted  to  humanity.  Phys- 
ical nature  is  mostly  manifested  by  tri-unity. 

The  evangelical  view  of  the  Godhead  does  not 
need  that  we  should  plead  this  analogy  in  its  sup- 
port ;  but  the  fact  that  matter  is  manifested,  in 
many  instances,  by  a  tri-unity,  and  that  the  nature 
of  elementary  things  is  such  that  they  seek  union 
in  a  trinity,  and  that  it  is  only  in  this  form  that 
they  have,  for  the  most  part,  a  practical  value  and 
relation  to  other  things — this,  we  affirm,  proves  this 
much,  viz.,  the  analogies  of  the  physical  world  are 
opposed  to  those  who  argue  from  nature,  as  you 
do,  for  absolute  unity  in  the  manifestation  or  in 
the  nature  of  God.  The  awful  solitude  of  one  in- 
dividual elementary  essence  is  a  thought  against 
which  the  heart  reluctates.     God  is  a  social  being  ; 


TR  I- UNITY.    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIND.      67 

and  the  tri-iinitj  of  his  nature  alone  enables  us  to 
conceive  of  him  as  such. 

As  you  have  introduced  this  form  of  illustration, 
suppose  we  look  into  the  intellectual  world,  and  in- 
quire whether  there  are  not  analogies  here  that 
connect  themselves  with  this  subject  ? 

Reason  is  an  absolute  unity.  Love  is  an  absolute 
unity.  Will  is  an  absolute  unity.  These  are  the 
same  in  themselves,  and  the  same  in  all  moral 
beings.  They  are  separable  from  each  other,  and 
yet  united  in  one  consciousness.  Human  reason, 
love,  and  will,  are  finite,  and  they  may  be  perverted 
in  finite  beings,  but  they  are  the  same  in  their  nature 
whether  they  inhere  in  an  infinite  or  in  a  finite  being* 

The  eldest  Scripture  declares  that  man  was 
created  in  the  moral  image  of  God.  To  infer, 
therefore,  the  moral  nature  of  the  Maker  from  the 
moral  nature  of  man,  is  not  only  warranted  by  the 
fact  that  reason^  will^  and  love  must  be  the  same  in 
kind  in  all  beings,  but  it  is  warranted  likewise  by 
the  statements  of  revelation.  Now,  while  we  do 
not  find  the  human  nature  manifesting  itself  tri- 
personally,  as  the  divine  does,  yet  we  do  find  hu- 
manity manifested  in  a  tri-partite  form.  And  thus 
reason  has  a  basis  in  the  one  for  accepting  what  is 
revealed  concerning  the  other. 


68      TRI-UJSriTY    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIND. 

Man  is  one  in  nature.  He  is  conscious  of  oneness 
in  himself;  while  yet  his  nature  is  such  that  it  can 
be  made  known  or  revealed  to  others  only  by  a  tri- 
fold  Aianifestation.  To  love  is  a  different  thing  from 
to  know;  and  to  hnoio  differs  both  from  to  will  and 
to  love;  yet  it  is  the  one  man  that  thinks,  wills,  and 
loves.  And  not  only  this,  but  while  these  powers 
of  the  human  mind  are  diverse  from  each  other, 
yet  the  whole  man  acts  in  each  of  them — the  whole 
man  ihinJcs,  wills,  or  loves. 

We  may  know  a  man  by  his  intellectual  mani- 
festation, while  we  know  little  or  nothing  of  his 
affections  and  will — nothing  of  his  moral  character. 
This  is  experienced  sometimes  when  we  read  an 
unknown  author.  We  only  know  a  man's  nature 
truly  when  he  has  revealed  himself  to  us  in  his 
threefold  manifestation  of  intellect,  sensibility,  and 
will. 

This  analogy  is  but  introductory.  It  does  not, 
in  my  opinion,  give  a  correct  idea  of  the  Trinity. 
A  better  analogy  than  this  can  be  derived  from  the 
economy  of  moral  natures.  The  logos  of  the  mind 
(or  tlie  mental  exercises  or  ideas)  is  not  the  same 
as  the  conscious  I  in  the  soul  of  man.  Thought  is 
born  of  man's  conscious  nature  as  the  light  is  born 
of  the  sun.     But  in  moral  beings  there  is  some- 


TRI-UNITY    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIKD.      69 

thing  that  stands  in  the  nature  back  of  thought,  and 
judges  of  its  character  and  fitness,  I  see  my 
thoughts  and  judge  of  them.*  The  I  that  sees 
and  judges  of  the  j^roduct  of  the  mind  is  as  sepa- 
rate from  the  thought,  in  one  sense,  as  the  subject 
is  from  the  object.  In  their  relation  to  each  other, 
the  one  is  beeiotten  of  the  substance  of  the  other ; 
yet  they  are  in  a  true  sense  one — one  is  the  mani- 
festation of  the  other — one  is  the  vital  image  or 
living  exhibition  of  the  other.  The  unknown  one  in 
the  human  or  in  the  divine  nature  can  be  made 
known  only  by  this  manifestation,  and  yet  the  true 
character  of  this  logos,  or  son  of  the  mind,  is  known 
only  to  the  unknown  one.  As  saith  the  Messiah, 
"No  man  knoweth  the  Son  but  the  Father;  and 
no  man  knoweth  the  Father  but  the  Son,  and  he  to 
whomsoever  the  Son  will  reveal  him." 

Again,  while  the  logos,  or  conceived  ideas,  is 
neither  the  affections  nor  the  will,  yet  will  and 
affection  are  manifested  through  and  by  the  intel- 
ligence. The  logos  is  the  out-birth  of  the  moral 
nature,  and  it  is  through  the  logos  that  the  tender- 

*  This  thought  undoubtedly  possessed  Richard  Baxter  when  he 
advised  his  friends  "  to  be  none  of  tliose  who  shall  charge  with 
heresy  all  who  stiy  the  three  persons  in  the  Godhead  are — God  un- 
derstanding himself,  God  midersiuod  by  himself,  and  God  loving  hun- 
self." 


70      TRI-UNITY    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIND. 

ness  of  tlie  affection  and  the  determination  of  the 
will  are  made  known  to  others.  The  logos  is  an 
out-birth.  "Will  and  love  are  a  procession  of  the 
moral  nature  through  the  logos.  Thej  are  seen  in 
the  intelligence,  and  manifested  by  it.* 

The  Scriptural  statement  then  may  be  affirmed  as 
profoundly  accordant  with  the  analogies  of  nature. 
"  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word,  and  the  Word 
was  with  God,  and  the  Word  was  God." 

Then  there  is  the  Word  conceived,  and  the 
Word  revealed  or  manifested.f 

*  "We  purposely,  for  the  most  part,  avoid  the  imperfect  definitions 
of  mental  philosophy,  and  use  such  words  as  we  hope  may  be  plain 
to  common  readers.  Such  as  will  refer  each  reader  to  his  own 
consciousness. 

\  Matthew  Henry,  the  best  read  in  the  Bible  of  all  the  commen- 
tators, has  clearly  conceived  and  distinctly  stated  the  inspired  con- 
ception in  the  first  of  John.  "We  give  the  passage  in  full,  for  the 
benefit  of  any  who  seldom  refer  to  this  most  biblical  of  all  the  com- 
mentators. 

"The  Chaldee  paraphrase  very  frequently  calls  the  Messia  tfie 
Word  of  Jehovah,  and  speaks  of  many  things  in  the  Old  Testament 
Baid  to  bo  done  by  the  Lord,  as  done  by  the  Word  of  the  Lord. 
Even  the  vulgar  Jews  were  taught  that  the  Word  of  God  was  the 
same  with  God.  The  evangelist,  in  the  close  of  his  discourse  (v.  18), 
plainly  tells  us  why  he  calls  Christ  the  Word  of  God — because  he  is 
"  the  only-begotten  Son  which  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father,  and  has  de- 
clared him.      Word  is  two-fold ;  word  conceived  and  word  uttered. 

(1 .)  There  is  the  word  conceived :  that  is  thought,  which  is  the  only 
immediate  product  of  the  soul  (all  the  operations  of  which  are  per- 
formed by  thought),  and  it  is  one  with  the  soul.  Thus  the  second 
person  in  the  Trinity  is  fitly  called  the  Word ;  for  be  is  the  first- 


TRI-UKITY    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIND.        71 

Some  passages  from  the  ancients,  held  at  the 
time  when  the  primitive  church  was  exercising  the 
power  which  converted  the  world,  will  give  the 
mode  of  thinking  among  the  best  men  of  that 
age. 

The  following  beautiful  passage  is  a  true  trans- 
lation from  the  Exhortation  of  Clement  of  Alexan- 
dria to  the  Greeks :  "The  divine  Logos — the 
Christ — was  the  cause  of  our  being,  and  our  well- 
being  also,/(9?'  he  was  in  God;  and  now  this  Logos 
himself  appears  to  men  ;  the  only  being  that  ever 
partook  of  both  natures,  as  well  that  of  God  as  of 
man  ;  to  be  the  cause  of  all  good  to  us.     From  him 

begotten  of  the  Father ;  that  eternal  wisdom  which  the  Lord  possessed, 
as  the  soul  doth  its  thought,  in  the  beginning  of  his  way,  Prov.  viii. 
22.  There  is  nothing  we  are  more  sure  of  than  that  we  think,  yet 
nothing  we  are  more  in  the  dark  about  than  how  we  think;  who  can 
declare  the  generation  of  thought  in  the  soul  ?  Surely  then  the  gen- 
erations and  births  of  the  eternal  mind  may  well  be  allowed  to  be 
great  mysteries  of  godliness,  which  we  can  not  fathom,  while  yet  we 
adore  the  depth. 

(2.)  There  is  the  loord  uttered,  and  that  is  speech.  Thus  Christ  is 
the  Word,  for  by  him  God  has  in  these  last  days  spoken  to  us  (Heb. 
i.  2),  and  has  directed  us  to  hear  him,  Matt.  xvii.  5.  He  has  made 
known  God's  mind  to  us,  as  a  man's  word  or  speech  makes  known 
bis  thoughts,  as  far  as  he  pleases,  and  no  farther.  Christ  is  called 
that  vjonderful  speaker  (Dan.  viii.  23),  the  speaker  of  things  hidden 
and  strange.  He  is  the  Word  speaking  from  God  to  us,  and  to  God 
for  us.  John  Baptist  was  the  voice ;  but  Christ  the  Word ;  being  the 
Word,  he  is  the  Truth,  the  Amen,  t?ie  faithful  Witness  of  the  mind  of 
God." 


72       TKI-UXITY    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIND. 

we  learn  to  live  virtuously ;  by  tim  we  are  con- 
ducted in  the  way  of  eternal  life ;  as  saitli  the 
divine  apostle  of  the  Lord,  '  The  love  of  God  the 
Saviour  was  manifested  to  all  men,  instructing  us 
in  order  that  we  having  abjured  all  impiety  and 
worldly  desires,  we  might  live  soberly  and  piously 
in  this  world,  expecting  in  blessed  hope  the  mani- 
festation of  the  glory  of  our  great  God  and  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ'  " 

Tertullian  says :  "The  Greeks  term  that  Logos 
which  we  translate  Word,  and  thus  our  people 
[i.  e.  the  Christians],  for  brevity  sake,  say,  '  In  the 
beginning  the  Word  was  with  God,'  though  it 
would  be  more  proper  to  say  reason  [or  thought], 
since  God  was  not  speaking  from  the  beginning, 
although  rational.  *  *  *  Considering,  there- 
fore, and  disposing  by  his  reason,  he  effected  his 
will  by  his  Word,  which  thou  mayest  easily  under- 
stand by  what  j^asses  in  thyself  *  *  •»  when 
thou  conferrest  silently  with  thine  own  reason." — 
TertuH.  adv.  Praxeam,  c.  v. 

Says  Justin,  Ap.  ii. :  "  It  is  not  allowable,  there- 
fore, to  think  otherwise  of  the  Spirit  and  the  Power 
which  is  in  God,  than  that  it  is  the  Logos,  which 
also  is  the  first-born  of  God." 

"  That  distinction  in  the   nature  of  God  which 


TEI-UNITY    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIND.      73 

would  lead  to  his  development  as  Father,  Son,  and 
Holj  Spirit,  and  which  fitted  him  for  this,  existed 
from  all  eternity,  and  was  an  inseparable  part  of 
his  nature ;  but  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  in 
the  full  sense  of  the  economy  of  the  gospel,  he 
actually  was  not,  until  the  incarnation  of  the  Logos, 
and  the  outpouring  of  the  Spirit  had  been  actually 
completed." — Moses  Stuart. 

The  origin  of  the  conceived  Word  is  as  old  as 
the  divine  mind.  He  was  in  the  beginning  with 
God — the  eternally-begotten  Son  of  the  Father. 
But  the  revealed  or  manifested  Word  is  no  older 
in  his  relations  to  men  than  the  time  when  the 
character  of  the  mind  is  manifested  to  others  by  its 
Logos.  "  No  man  hath  seen  God  at  any  time ;  the 
only-begotten  /Son,  which  IS  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father^ 
he  hath  declared  him.'''' 

Man  can  embody  his  logos  impersonally  in  writ- 
ten language,  and  send  it  thus  embodied  to  all 
nations  who  understand  the  written  character. 
Why  then  might  not  the  "  Word  of  God  become 
flesh  ?"  Why  might  not  the  Son  of  God  thus  be- 
come personally  incarnate,  so  that  the  affections 
and  will  of  the  Father  might  be  expressed  in  him 
and  through  him,  not  impersonally  but  personally, 
iu  life  and  power  ?     The  Scriptures  affirm,  what  a 


74       TRI-UNITY    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIND. 

true  reason  approves,  that  the  "Word  of  God  did 
become  flesh,  and  that  Christ  is  the  "  out-shining 
of  the  Father's  glorj,  and  the  express  image  of  his 
person."  "  He  that  hath  seen  Christ  hath  seen  the 
Father."  The  embodiment  of  man's  logos  in  lan- 
guage is  only  vital  with  intelligence.  The  embodi- 
ment of  the  divine  logos  is  the  revealment  of  the 
"  fullness  of  the  Godhead  bodily" — the  logos  in  a 
nature  in  which  can  be  manifested  not  only  the  in- 
telligence but  the  affection  and  will  of  God. 

Let  us  advance  one  step  further,  and  look  at  this 
thought  in  another  aspect.  Jesus  said  to  his  dis- 
ciples, "  It  is  expedient  for  you  that  I  go  away,  for 
if  I  go  not  away,  the  Holy  Spirit,  or  Comforter,  will 
not  come  unto  you ;  but  if  I  go  away  I  will  send 
him  unto  you ;  and  when  he  is  come,  he  will  not 
speak  of  himself,  but  he  will  take  of  the  things 
that  belong  to  me,  and  show  them  unto  you." 

Thus  the  Spirit  is  represented  not  as  a  revealer 
of  new  truth,  but  as  a  personal  procession  from  the 
Father  through  the  Son  into  the  hearts  of  believers. 
He  takes  the  facts  furnished  by  the  Logos,  and,  by 
a  revealment  of  life  and  love,  gives  efficacy  (as  di- 
vine power  and  love  alone  can  do)  to  the  truth  as 
it  is  in  Jesus.  The  Son  is  eternally-begotten  of  the 
Father — the  same  in  nature  with  him,  and  the  only 


TKI-UNITY    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIND.       75 

revealer  of  the  Father.  The  Holy  Spirit  comes  to 
lis  in  power  and  love,  baptized  in  the  humanities 
of  Christ,  being  revealed  in  and  through  the  Son. 
Christ  furnishes  the  material  for  redemption — the 
facts  which  reveal  the  divine  nature.  The  Holy 
Spirit  applies  them  in  the  soul.  Hence,  Christ  and 
the  Holy  Spirit  dwelling  in  believers  are  inter- 
changeable terms  in  the  New  Testament.  The 
Father  and  the  Son  are  likewise  interchangeable. 
"  I  am  in  the  Father  and  the  Father  in  me."  So 
"  the  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  love 
of  God  the  Father,  and  the  communion  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,"  are  with  those  who  believe.  Such,  un- 
doubtedly, is  the  apostolic  conception. 

Let  us  look  again  into  the  human  consciousness, 
and  listen  again  to  the  voice  of  reason,  while  we 
consider  revealed  truth  in  another  aspect. 

Human  nature,  as  constituted  by  its  Maker, 
■would  certainly  be  fitted  to  appreciate  the  divine 
character.  The  moral  relations  between  God  and 
man,  the  one  being  a  sovereign,  the  other  a  subject, 
require  this ;  and  the  fitness  of  things  observable 
throughout  the  creation,  assure  us  of  the  fact.  An 
argument,  therefore,  for  the  trinity  may  be  found  in 
its  adaptations  to  the  mental  constitution  and  moral 
necessities  of  man.     Let  us  inquire  then  for  the 


76       TRI-UNITY    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIND. 

value  of  the  doctrine  as  adapted  to  meet  the  finite 
apprehension  of  men,  and  to  aid  them  in  approxi- 
mating a  knowledge  of  the  character  of  God. 

The  mind  of  man  has  a  logical  conformation.  It 
is  made  to  ratiocinate,  to  develop  processes  of  syn- 
thesis, analysis,  and  generalization.  In  stud3dDg 
the  nature  of  Siuy  thing,  we  combine  its  manifesta- 
tions, or  phenomena,  and  thus  gain  a  knowledge 
of  its  true  character.  This  being  the  character  of 
the  mind,  it  is  adapted  by  its  constitution  to  attain 
ultimate  knowledge  of  God  through  the  revealed 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  in  the  same  way  by  which 
it  attains  knowledge  of  other  things,  that  is,  bt/  the 
eocerctse  of  lis  rational  powers.  If  the  knowledge  of 
God's  character,  as  well  as  his  being,  were  by  intu- 
ition, as  Mr.  Parker  teaches,  man  would  not  know 
the  character  of  God  as  a  reasoning  being,  but  as  an 
unreasoning  animal. 

The  character  of  God  is  adapted  to  regenerate 
nature,  and  adapted  to  regenerated  nature ;  hence 
man's  rational  nature  is  profoundly  adapted  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  The  mind  of  man  can  not 
apprehend  the  divine  character,  nor  the  relations 
of  God  to  his  creatures,  by  a  single  conception. 
Even  the  character  and  relations  of  an  earthly 
ruler  can  not  be  compassed  by  one  view  of  the 


TKI-UNITY    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIND.        77 

mind.  Yictoria  is  not  only  Regina,  but  she  is  De- 
fender of  the  Faith  and  patroness  of  the  great 
charities  of  her  queendom.  (We  speak  of  Yictoria 
because  she  is  a  rare  instance  of  a  virtuous  sove- 
reign, while  she  combines  in  her  person  regal,  spir- 
itual, and  benevolent  prerogative.)  In  order  to 
form  a  true  idea  of  the  character  of  this  sovereign, 
and  of  her  relations  to  her  realm,  we  must  form  the 
distinct  conception  of  three  regal  offices,  and  of  the 
queen  acting  personally  in  each  of  these,  and  then 
combine  these  several  conceptions  in  one  charac- 
ter.* By  this  illustration  we  do  not,  of  course, 
mean  to  be  understood  that  the  Christ-hood  is  only 
God  acting  officially  :  while  this  is  true,  yet  it  is,  as 
we  have  shown,  also  true  that  Christ  is  Logos — the 
revealer  of  the  Godhead  bodily  and  personally. 
The  statement  is  presented  to  prove  a  fact  which  is 
verified  in  the  experience  of  every  man — (a  fact, 
the  consideration  of  which  ought  to  influence  the 
mind  of  skeptics  to  a  right  conclusion) — that  the 
mind   of    man   is   so   constituted,    that  the   triune 

*  It  would,  perhaps,  be  more  proper  to  say  that  person  is  an  in- 
tuition or  coetaneous  conception  always  present  in  the  mind  when 
v.'e  conceive  of  a  moral  being ;  and  the  three  offices  attach  them- 
selves by  a  mental  necessity  to  the  one  name  of  Victoria ;  and  then 
the  character  of  Victoria  must  be  derived  from  her  action  in  them 
alL 


78       TRI-UNITY    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIND. 

manifestation  of  God  is  adapted  to  enable  him  as  a 
rational  being  to  compreliend  God ;  and  that  by 
this  manifestation  be  can  approximate  the  absolute 
truth,  far  beyond  any  attainment  he  could  make  by 
his  own  unaided  conception. 

That  man  can  have  no  just  idea  of  God  who  en- 
deavors to  compass  the  divine  mind  in  a  single 
thought.  The  bare  idea  of  power  and  Godhead 
transfers  the  mind  back  from  the  third  to  the  first 
dispensation,  when  the  Almighty  was  known  as 
God  of  Creation  only ;  not  as  Jehovah,  more  per- 
fectly revealed  to  Moses,  in  the  second  dispensa- 
tion ;  nor  as  God  in  Christ,  most  perfectly  revealed 
in  the  New  Testament.  After  we  have  appre- 
hended God  as  the  Father  Almighty,  and  conceived 
of  him  as  truth  and  love  in  Christ,  and  as  an  every- 
where-present life  and  power  in  the  Spirit ;  after 
the  soul  has  appreciated  and  appropriated,  by  faith, 
all  that  there  is  in  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost, 
then  only  it  has  arisen  to  the  best  knowledge  that  a 
finite  mind  can  gain  of  the  character  of  the  true 
God.  Hence  it  is  written,  "  Go  teach  all  nations, 
baptizing  them  into  the  ONE  name  but  tJiree  per- 
sons— the  Father,  the  Son,  the  Holy  Ghost — 
and  lo  !  I  am  with  you  always,  even  to  the  end 
of  the  dispensation." 


TRI-UNITY    OF    THE    DIVINE    MIND.        79 

The  Christian  alone  who  has  faith  in  the  Trin- 
ity, as  revealed  in  the  New  Testament,  obtains  an 
adequate  and  vitalizing  knowledge  of  God.  Tlie 
God  of  one  intuition  or  conception  is  an  abstract  nul- 
lity, devoid  of  all  moral  power  over  human  character 
and  human  life.  The  God  of  one  intuition,  with 
the  superadded  characteristics  which  man's  follj  or 
his  philosophy  always  frames  when  he  is  devoid 
of  faith  in  revelation,  is  more  or  less  an  erroneous 
and  corrupting  concej^tion.  Christianity  alone  en- 
lightens the  natural  mind,  guides  the  reason,  and 
matures  the  conception  of  the  divine  character. 
Hence  the  idea  of  God,  as  conceived  by  such  men 
as  Mr.  Parker,  who  reject  revealed  religion,  is  in- 
congruous and  foolish.  The  Christian  alone  rises 
by  faith  to  a  knowledge  of  the  living  and  true  God, 
clothed  in  his  attributes  of  pov/er,  light,  and  love. 

Shall  we  not,  then,  my  dear  sir,  turn  away  from 
the  hallucinations  of  the  skeptics,  and  the  moon- 
shine rationalisms  of  the  transceudentalists,  and 
seek  in  the  Scriptures  the  knowledge  of  God, 
"  whom  to  know  ARIGHT  is  life  eternal." 

Yours  in  defense  of  revealed,  rational,  and  spirit- 
ually-efficacious Christianity, 


LETTEE   Yl. 

depravity. 

My  Dear  Sir  : — 

The  doctrine  of  human  depravity  is  rejected 
contemptuously  by  the  skeptics  of  our  day  ;  and  with 
these  there  are  many  good  and  thoughtful  men  who 
misapprehend  its  import,  and  hence  doubt  of  its 
truth.  This  latter  class  is  led  into  doubt  upon  this 
subject  about  as  much  by  the  overstrained  defini- 
tion of  some  orthodox  preachers,  as  they  are  by  the 
same  fault  on  the  part  of  those  who  oppose  Chris- 
tianity as  a  system  of  revealed  religion. 

There  is  a  basis  in  human  reason  and  experience, 
as  well  as  in  revelation,  for  this  doctrine  ;  and  nei- 
ther the  misstatements  of  the  friends  of  Christianity, 
nor  the  waZ-statemcnts  of  its  enemies,  can  invalidate 
the  facts  and  reasons  upon  which  the  doctrine 
rests. 

The  statement  that  men  are  by  nature  averse  to 
all  good,  and  as  evil  as  it  is  possible  for  them  to 
be,  is  not  true  to  the  common  sense  of  men,  nor  in 


DEPRAVITY.  81 

the  common  use  of  language.  Sucli  expressions 
may  be  explained  into  accordance  witli  the  Scrip- 
tures, but  it  is  far  better  to  avoid  the  extreme  ex- 
pression to  which  every  denomination  (from  the 
very  nature  of  selfishness)  is  prone  to  carry  its 
own  distinguishing  tenets,  and  present  the  Christian 
doctrines  in  such  phraseology  as  falls  clearly  within 
the  import  of  the  facts  and  texts  upon  which  they 
are  grounded. 

While,  therefore,  there  may  be  some  apology  for 
misapprehension  on  this  subject,  there  can  be  no 
good  apology  for  such  mal-statement  as  that  of 
Mr.  Parker  to  which  we  have  already  alluded,  viz., 
"  The  popular  religion  is  hostile  to  man ;  tells  us 
he  is  an  outcast ;  not  a  child  of  God,  hut  a  spurious 
issue  of  the  devils 

The  most  trustworthy  writers  on  this  subject 
always  state  the  question  in  its  connections,  and 
with  the  limitations  which  experience  and  the  Bible 
require.  Dr.  Chalmers,  in  speaking  of  those  who 
are  unregenerated,  says :  "  The  principle  upon 
which  you  may  have  acted  may  be  respectable  and 
honorable  and  amiable.  We  are  not  disputing  all 
this.  We  are  only  saying  that  it  is  not  the  love 
of  God.  And  should  we  hear  any  one  of  you  as- 
sert that  I  have  nothing  to  reproach  myself  with, 

4* 


82  DEPRAVIT'Y. 

and  that  I  give  every  body  their  own,  and  that  I 
possess  a  fair  character  in  society,  and  have  done 
nothing  to  forfeit  it ;  and  that  I  have  my  share  of 
generosity  and  honor,  of  tenderness  and  civiHty : 
our  only  reply  is,  that  this  may  be  very  true  ;  you 
may  have  a  very  large  share  of  these  and  of  other 
estimable  principles,  but  along  with  the  possession 
of  these  many  things,  you  may  lack  one  thing,  and 
that  one  thing  ma}^  be  the  love  of  God.  An  en- 
lightened discerner  of  the  heart  may  look  into  you 
and  say  with  our  Saviour,  '  I  know  you  that  ye 
have  not  the  love  of  God  in  you.' " 

We  will  give  another  extract  from  a  writer  gen- 
erally accepted  among  evangelical  Christians — one 
of  the  most  clear-minded  and  pure-hearted  men  of 
his  age.  These  extracts  are  given  at  length,  in 
order  that  you  may  consider  this  subject  unbiased 
by  the  opinion  that  the  views  which  we  shall  pre- 
sent do  not  apply  to  the  subject  as  generally  re- 
ceived by  enlightened  Christians. 

We  do  not,  as  we  have  already  said,  present  our 
views  as  an  exposition  of  the  symbols  of  any  one 
denomination — some  of  the  creeds  were  wrought 
out  by  good  men  in  a  darker  age  than  the  present. 
We  write  to  show  that  the  doctrine  of  human  de- 
pravity,   as  revealed  in   the    Scriptures    and   ex- 


DEPRAVITY.  83 

pounded  by  men  of  spiritual  apprehension,  accords 
■with  reason  and  with  human  experience. 

Dr.  Dwight  says  :  "  The  human  character  is  not 
de])raved  to  the  full  extent  of  the  human  powers.  It 
has  been  said,  neither  unfrequentlj  nor  by  men 
void  of  understanding,  that  man  is  as  depraved  a 
being  as  his  faculties  will  permit  him  to  be ;  but 
this  has  been  said  without  consideration  and  with- 
out truth.  Neither  Scripture  nor  experience  war- 
rant the  assertion.  '  Wicked  men  and  deceivers,' 
it  is  declared,  '  wax  worse  and  worse,  deceiving 
and  being  deceived.'  During  the  first  half  of  hu- 
man life  this  may,  perhaps,  be  explained  by  the 
growth  of  the  faculties,  but  during  a  considerable 
period  preceding  its  termination  it  can  not  thus  be 
explained,  for  the  faculties  decay  while  the  de- 
pravity still  increases."  "  The  young  man  who 
came  to  Christ  to  know  what  good  thing  he  should 
do  to  inherit  eternal  life,  was  certainly  less  de- 
praved than  his  talents  would  have  permitted  him 
to  be. 

"  Like  him,  we  see  daily  many  men  who  neither 
are  nor  profess  to  be  Christians,  and  who,  instead 
of  being  wicked  to  a  degree  commensurate  with 
their  faculties,  go  through  life  in  the  exercise  of  dis- 
positions so  sincere,  just,  and  amiable,  a:  <!  in  the 


84  D  E  P  R  A  V I  T  Y. 

performance  of  actions  so  upriglit  and  beneficent, 
as  to  secure  a  high  degree  of  respect  and  affection 
from  ourselves,  and  from  all  with  whom  they  are 
connected.  It  certainly  can  not  be  said  that  such 
men  are  as  sinful  as  many  others  possessed  of 
powers  far  inferior,  much  less  that  they  are  as  sin- 
ful as  the}^  can  be.  Those  who  make  the  assertion 
against  which  I  am  contending,  will  find  them- 
selves, if  they  will  examine,  rarely  believing  that 
their  wives  and  children,  though  not  Christians,  are 
fiends." 

Again,  Dr.  Dwight  says:  "Some  of  the  natural 
human  characteristics  are  amiable.  Such  are  natu- 
ral affection ;  the  simplicity  and  sweetness  of  dis- 
position in  children,  often  found  also  in  persons  of 
adult  years ;  compassion,  generosity,  modesty,  and 
what  is  sometimes  called  natural  conscientiousness^ 
that  is,  a  fixed  and  strong  sense  of  the  importance 
of  doing  that  which  is  right.  These  characteristics 
appear  to  have  adorned  the  young  man  whom  I 
have  already  mentioned.  We  know  that  they  are 
amiable,  because  we  are  informed  that  ^  Jesus,  be- 
holding him,  loved  hira.^  In  the  same  manner  we, 
and  all  others  v>ho  are  not  abandoned,  love  them 
always  anfl  irresistibly,  whenever  they  are  pre- 
sented t"  jur  view.     They  all,  also,  are  required. 


DEPRAVITY.  85 

and  exist  in  every  Christian,  enhancing  his  holiness 
and  rendering  him  a  better  man.  Without  them  it 
is  not  easy  to  perceive  how  the  Christian  character 
could  exist.  Accordingly,  Saint  Paul  exhibits 
those  who  are  destitute  of  these  attributes  as  being 
literally  profligates." 

If,  then,  the  doctrine  of  human  depravity,  as  ex- 
pounded by  the  accepted  teachers  of  the  orthodox 
faith,  does  not  affirm  that  man's  faculties  are 
wholly  depraved ;  if  it  be  a  manifest  and  indubit- 
able fact  that  men  may  possess  by  nature  many  ex- 
cellent and  amiable  qualities  for  which  we  ought  to 
love  them ;  what  then  is  the  scriptural,  rational, 
and  experimental  import  of  the  doctrine  of  human 
depravity,  and  in  what  sense  are  all  men  de- 
praved ? 

It  is  affirmed  in  tbe  Scrij)tures,  and  Mr.  Parker 
adopts  the  principle  as  a  tenet  of  absolute  religion, 
that  man  shall  love  God  with  all  his  heart,  and  his 
neighbor  as  himself.  Of  the  obligation  of  this  re- 
quirement there  can  be  no  doubt.  God  is  the 
supreme  being,  and  the  best  being,  and,  therefore, 
of  right  demands  supreme  love.  The  interests  of 
other  men  are  as  valuable  to  them  as  our  interests 
are  to  us ;  hence  they  should  be  regarded  equally 
with  our  own.     This  is  the  moral  law  of  the  uni- 


86  DEPRAVIIM'. 

verse.  To  this  all  agree.  Now,  tlie  question  is  not 
whether  some  men  have  not  by  nature  many  good 
qualities,  nor  whether  any  man  is  as  bad  as  he 
could  be  ?  But  the  question  is,  whether  men  do  hy 
nature  love  and  obey  Godf  whether  they  are  hy  nature 
conformed  or  unconformed  to  the  moral  law  of  Ood? 

The  question,  when  fairly  stated,  is  a  very  plain 
one ;  and  the  man  who  doubts  of  human  depravity 
in  the  light  of  a  true  statement,  can  have  but  little 
apprehension  either  of  God's  character  or  of  his 
own.  If  men  loved  and  obeyed  the  true  God  by 
nature,  they  would  have  to  mate  an  effort  not  to 
love  and  obey  him.  Every  body  knows  that  the 
reverse  of  this  is  true,  and  that  the  effort  is  on  the 
other  side  of  the  question.  But  while  argument 
may  not  make  a  palpable  experience  more  plain  to 
Christians,  it  may  promote  right  conviction  with 
those  who  are  not.  Let  us,  then,  look  first  at  the 
testimony  of  universal  consciousness. 

I  need  not  recite  to  you  those  passages  from  the 
ancient  classics  with  which  you  are  more  familiar 
than  I  am  m}  self.  Epictetus,  speaking  of  the  con- 
sciousness of  every  natural  mind  in  which  the 
moral  sense  is  not  obliterated,  says,  almost  in  the 
words  of  Paul,  or  rather  Paul  says,  almost  in  his 
words,  "  He  that  sins  does  not  what  he  would,  but 


DEPRAVITY.  87 

what  he  would  not,  that  he  does."  In  accordance 
■with  this  speak  all  the  worthy  ancients  who  have 
given  us  their  self- consciousness  on  moral  subjects. 
Take  again  the  testimony  of  universal  history. 
It  can  not  be  doubted  that  humanity  has  always 
been  found  by  the  light  of  history  and  revelation 
in  a  corrupted  moral  state.  "We  mean,  distinctly, 
in  a  state  entirely  destitute  of  supreme  love  to  God 
as  a  holy  sovereign,  and  to  men  as  brothers.  That 
civilization  made  progress  in  some  old  nations — that 
intellectual  light  and  a  perception  of  moral  truths 
were  in  some  minds  clear  and  strong,  is  granted; 
but  the  knowledge  of  God,  the  disposition  to  love 
men  as  brethren,  and  a  prevalent  regard  for  moral 
purity,  is  not  the  natural  state  of  man.  The  fact  is 
striking  as  it  is  indubitable,  that  the  most  enlight- 
ened nations,  as  they  increased  in  years,  have  in- 
variably, without  the  aid  of  revelation,  become 
more  corrupt.  And  as  they  added  years,  they 
added  evil  to  their  national  life.  (Yide  Phil.  Plan 
Sal.,  ch.  i.)  And  even  now,  in  lands  professing  to 
receive  the  religion  of  Christ,  and  among  those  who 
recognize  the  obligation  to  love  God  as  the  com- 
mon Father,  and  all  men  as  brethren — even  in 
Christendom,  notwithstanding  an  assent  to  right 
principles,  war  and  lust,  pride  and  self-seeking,  are 


88  DEPRAVITY. 

the  rule,  and  obedience  to  tlie  recognized  moral 
law  of  love  is  the  exception. 

Leaving  the  universal  law  of  love  out  of  the 
question,  which  is  the  recognized  standard  of  duty, 
and  to  which  man  would  be  conformed  if  he,  by 
nature,  knew  and  obeyed  the  true  God — even  set- 
ting this  aside,  it  is  true  that  men  have  in  all  ages 
been  conscious  of  being  unconformed  to  their  own 
knowledge  of  duty.  This  is  evidenced  by  the  fact, 
that  the  human  consciousness  of  sin  in  all  time 
(until  Christ's  sacrifice)  has  been  evinced  by  the 
sacrifice  of  victims,  human  and  bestial,  as  expiatory 
or  propitiatory  offerings,  to  procure  reconciliation 
with  God. 

This  testimony  of  universal  consciousness,  uni- 
versal history,  and  universal  conduct,  can  not  go  for 
nothing.  To  make  a  light  thing  of  the  deepest 
and  most  solemnly-expressed  convictions  of  human 
nature,  is  to  be  untrue  to  humanity  as  it  is.  The 
human  consciousness  cries  out  for  reconciliation 
with  God.  The  man  who  answers  that  it  needs 
none,  is  as  injurious  to  the  soul  as  a  physician 
would  be  to  the  body,  who,  in  a  dangerous  mal- 
ady, should  give  oj^iatcs,  and  let  the  disease  take 
its  course. 

But  in  view  of  Mr.  Parker's  own  theories,  how 


DEPRAVITY.  89 

can  lie  avoid  admitting  the  total  depravity  of  hu- 
man nature  ?  Indeed,  it  is  true  that  he,  in  state- 
ment, apparently  unconscious  that  almost  his  whole 
book  is  in  contradiction  to  this,  utters  words  affirm- 
ing the  depravity  of  humanity  and  the  necessity  of 
Christ's  death.  He  says  (p.  467),  "  The  history  of 
society  is  summed  up  in  a  word — Cain  hilled  Abel. 
That  of  real  Christianity  also  in  a  word — Christ 
died  for  his  hrothersy 

The  direct  inference  from  Mr.  Parker's  philoso- 
phy goes  likewise  to  establish  the  opposite  of  what 
he  believes.  If  man  has  by  intuition,  or  in  some 
other  way,  a  "  true  idea  of  God,  which  is  the  same 
in  all  men,"  then  it  follows  as  a  fact  corroborated 
by  all  history,  that  man  must  have  propensities  so 
totally  depraved  that  they  lead  him  to  reject  the 
true  knowledge  of  the  divine,  and  plunge  into 
darkness  and  evil,  notwithstanding  the  counter  in- 
fluence of  Mr.  Parker's  absolute  religion.  If  this 
be  not  an  evidence  of  depravity,  we  would  humbly 
inquire  what  can  be  evidence  in  the  case  ? 

Perhaps  Mr,  Parker  would  refer  us  to  the  con- 
ception which  he  says  man  gets  from  nature,  and 
then  tell  us  that  the  conception  obscures  the  intu- 
ition. Then,  two  things  follow — first,  that  all  na- 
ture is  depraved  from  which  man  gets  the  obscur- 


90  DEPRAVITY. 

ing  conception ;  and,  second,  that  God  has  given 
man  a  true  idea  of  himself,  which  is  not  strong 
enough  to  resist  the  depraving  power  of  depraved 
nature.  Yet  Mr.  Parker  affirms  "  tbe  popular  doc- 
trine of  depravity"  to  be  a  "  No-facV 

But  let  us  turn  from  the  "  variations"  found  in 
the  "  Discourses  of  Eeligion,"  and  look  at  the  ap- 
peal which  may  be  made  to  each  individual's  con- 
sciousness in  behalf  of  the  doctrine  of  depravity. 

Men  will  acknowledge  that  they  do  not  live  up 
to  the  amount  of  their  knowledge — ^that  they  do 
not  live  up  to  their  ability — that  they  do  not  live 
up  to  their  conscience.  Now,  what  is  the  reason 
of  this  ?  Who  will  answer  ?  The  brute  lives  up 
to  the  best  instincts  of  his  nature.  The  brute  con- 
forms by  nature  to  the  laws  of  his  highest  life  and 
happiness.  Why  is  not  man  thus  conformed  to 
the  moral  law  of  love  ?  Why  does  he  not  by  na- 
ture live  a  life  like  Christ  ?  Let  the  reader  frankly 
acknowledge  that  it  is  because  the  current  of  the 
human  will  runs  in  another  direction.  Hence  it  is 
the  experience  of  every  living  man  who  seeks  con- 
formity to  the  will  of  God,  that  he  must  struggle 
against  the  inertia  and  earthly  and  selfish  propen- 
sions  of  his  natural  mind.  And  it  is  likewise,  as 
we  believe,  an  experience,  that  divine  aid  alone 


DEPRAVITY.  91 

enables  the  soul  to  rise  above  tlie  natural  into  tlie 
spiritual  life. 

We  repeat,  if  there  be  any  thing  plain  in  the 
Scriptures,  it  is  the  struggle  or  spiritual  warfare 
that  is  necessary  to  attain  and  maintain  conformity 
to  the  will  of  God  as  manifested  in  Christ.  If  there 
be  any  thing  true  in  Christian  experience  it  is  this 
same  warfare — a  warfare  which  reaches  a  conscious 
and  joyful  triumph  only  by  faith  in  Christ,  as  a 
present  divine  Saviour.  If  men  by  nature  be  not 
out  of  conformity  with  the  law  of  God,  then  the 
whole  tenor  of  the  New  Testament  and  all  Christian 
experience  are  together  false,  because  the  one  af- 
firms what  the  other  realizes. 

But  it  is  not  possible  to  lead  any  man  who  has 
ever  seriously  endeavored  to  be  like  Christ,  to 
doubt  that  by  nature  his  will  "  is  ahenated  from  the 
life  of  God."  Transcendentalism  may  lead  men  of  no 
Christian  purpose  to  doubt,  hut  it  can  do  no  more. 
The  man  who  permits  his  boat  to  float  upon  the 
current  of  Lake  Superior  will  move  downward 
without  an  effort  to  the  more  rapid  current  of  the 
Niagara  river.  He  can  not  be  conscious  of  any 
effort,  because  he  makes  none.  It  requires  no  ef- 
fort to  float  with  the  current.  But  if  a  man  will 
save  himself  from  going  over  the  falls,  he  must 


92  DEPRAVITY. 

turn  his  boat  against  the  stream,  and  his  labors  will 
grow  light,  and  his  hope  and  peace  will  iucrease,  as 
he  escapes  the  dangerous  current,  and  sees  on  the 
farthermost  verge  of  the  lake  the  light-house  of  the 
homeward-bound.  So  the  Christian  who  has  strug.- 
gled  against  the  natural  current  of  the  will,  finds 
peace  as  he  overcomes,  and  rejoices  as  the  light 
grows  brighter  which  shines  out  from  the  "  light- 
house in  the  sky." 

The  teachings  of  the  Scriptures  on  this  subject 
not  only  accord  with  experience,  but  they  contain 
a  profound  philosophy,  which  will,  by  some  future 
writer,  be  developed  in  a  more  satisfactory  manner 
than  it  is  at  present.  Allow  me,  in  conclusion,  an 
allusion  to  this  philosophy. 

Adam,  the  origin  of  our  transmitted  humanity,  is 
said  to  have  been  a  "  living  soul."  Christ,  the 
source  of  our  spiritual  and  eternal  life^  is  "  a  quick- 
ening Spirit."  We  inherit  from  Adam  an  earthly 
nature,  whose  appetites,  motives,  aspirations,  are 
limited  to  the  earth.  This  is,  in  the  language  of 
the  New  Testament,  "  the  natural  mind,"  "  the  old 
man,"  "  the  flesh."  The  first  birtli  is  natural,  and 
gives  to  man  only  earthly  and  selfish  instincts  and 
aspirations.  Man  by  nature  may  be  an  amiable 
and  excellent  earthly  being,  or  he  may  be  a  morally 


DEPRAVITY.  93 

deformed  and  despicable  one ;  but  still  lie  is  "  of 
the  earth  earthy,"  and,  as  Jesus  affirmed,  "  the  love 
of  God  is  not  in  him."  He  is  "  alive"  to  earthly 
and  selfish  motives  and  objects ;  but  he  is  "  dead 
unto  God;"  he  does  not  feel  and  move  in  view  of 
what  God  is,  nor  in  view  of  what  he  has  com- 
manded. In  his  mind  his  own  will,  not  the  will  of 
God,  is  supreme;  and  he  resists  subjection  to  the 
will  of  God  as  much  as  an  animal  (/e?'e  naturce), 
wild  by  nature,  resists  subjection  to  the  will  of  man. 
The  divine  Teacher  affirmed  the  foundational  truth 
on  this  subject  when  he  said,  "  That  which  is  born 
of  the  flesh  is  flesh,  that  which  is  born  of  the 
Spirit  is  spirit." 

Christ  is  a  "life-giving  Spirit;"  and  the  new 
spiritual  life  which  proceeds  from  him  is  superin- 
duced upon  an  animal  or  earthly  nature.  Chris- 
tians are  twice  born — first  by  nature — again  by 
Spirit.  By  the  second  birth,  the  soul  that  was 
spiritually  dead  before,  begins  to  live  and  move 
in  view  of  God's  character,  will,  and  manifested 
benevolence  in  Christ.  By  the  first  birth  every 
man  has  the  mental  and  fleshly  nature  of  Adam ; 
by  the  second  birth  every  believer  has  in  him  the 
spiritual  lineaments  of  Christ.  This  new  divine 
nature  is  developed  out  of  the  old  earthly  nature, 


94  DEPRAVITY. 

or  superinduced  upon  it.  As  the  chrysalis  has  the 
lineaments  of  the  butterfly  within  it,  while  yet  it 
retains  the  body,  and,  to  some  extent,  the  instincts 
of  the  caterpillar,  so  the  Christian  has  the  spirit- 
ual lineaments  of  Christ  formed  in  his  soul  while 
yet  he  retains  the  earthly  nature  of  his  earthly 
progenitor.  In  the  resurrection  the  spiritual  soul, 
disenthralled  from  its  Adamic  corporeity,  will 
assimilate  to  itself,  by  divine  power,  a  body  of  a 
spiritual  nature,  adapted  to  the  propensions  of  its 
new  spiritual  life,  "  fashioned  like  unto  Christ's 
glorious  body."  Hence,  the  "  image  of  Christ 
formed  in  the  soul"  Acre,  is  the  only  "  hope  of  glory'^ 
hereafter. 

The  spiritual  and  the  earthly  nature — ^the  one 
being  superinduced  upon  the  other — are  antagonis- 
tic the  one  to  the  other.  It  is  reasonable  to  sup- 
pose that,  as  in  the  lipodeptera,  the  rudiments  of 
the  winged  insect  prevail  against  the  worm  from 
which  it  is  developed,  the  antagonistic  efforts  of  the 
two  opposing  instincts  are  felt,  and  the  one  prevails 
over  the  other  with  a  struggle ;  so,  in  the  case  of 
those  who  are  "  born  of  the  Spirit,"  "  the  flesh 
lustcth  against  the  Spirit,  and  the  Spirit  against  the 
flesh,  and  these  are  contrary  the  one  to  the  other." 

When  a  man  is  born  again,  the  two  natures  are 


DEPRAVITY.  95 

distinctly  marked  by  tlie  diverse  aliment  upon 
which  they  liva  The  natural  mind  lives  on  natu- 
ral aliment,  and  seeks  its  highest  good  on  earth. 
The  spiritual  mind  grows  and  develops  itself  by 
truth.  The  new  nature  draws  its  life  from  Christ. 
The  conscience,  the  affections,  and  the  will,  live 
and  move  in  view  of  God  in  Christ.  God  becomes 
the  spiritual  Father  of  the  spiritual  soul,  and  the 
"  new-created"  is  a  son.  Truth  is  eternal — Christ 
is  eternal.  Hence,  the  soul  which  lives  on  this 
aliment  has  eternal  life.  Jesus  said,  "/  am  the 
bread  of  life,  of  which  if  a  man  eat  he  shall  never  die, 
but  shall  have  everlasting  life^  The  natural  man 
"  liveth  by  bread  alone,"  but  the  Christian  liveth 
"  by  every  word  that  proceedeth  out  of  the  mouth 
of  God." 

In  the  light  of  this  philosophy,  which  is  discrim* 
inatingly  true  to  the  Scriptures,  we  may  see  the 
reason  and  the  necessity  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
divine  Spirit.  The  glory  of  the  gospel  is  in  its 
power,  offered  at  this  point,  to  transform  the  hu- 
man soul  from  the  habitudes  of  an  earthly  to  that 
of  a  spiritual  life,  A  nature  can  not  transform 
itself  One  species  can  not  produce  another.  The 
instincts  of  the  earthly  nature  can  not  turn  against 
themselves.     The  germ  of  the  new  nature  must  be 


96  DEPRAVITY. 

"begotten"  in  order  to  prevail  against  the  old. 
When  the  new  nature  is  begotten,  the  old  nature 
becomes  as  a  body  of  death,  until  the  new  rises 
above  it,  and  brings  it  into  subserviency. 

The  Scriptures  exhibit  this  subject  more  dis- 
tinctly than  I  am  able  to  do.  I  will  close  this  long 
letter  with  a  quotation,  and  some  inferences  from  it. 

The  apostle,  in  his  letter  to  the  Eomans,  says  : 
"  There  is,  therefore,  now  no  condemnation  to  them 
which  are  in  Christ  Jesus,  who  walk  not  after  the 
flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit ;  for  the  law  of  the  Spirit 
of  Life  in  Christ  Jesus  hath  made  me  free  from  the 
law  of  sin  and  death.  For  what  the  law  could  not 
do  in  that  it  was  weak  through  the  flesh  [or  because 
of  the  earthly  nature],  God  sending  his  own  Son 
in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh,  and  for  sin  [as  a  sac- 
rifice for  sin],  condemned  sin  in  the  flesh,  that  the 
righteousness  of  the  law  may  be  fulfilled  in  us, 
who  walk,  not  after  the  flesh  but  after  the  Spirit 
[i.  e.  not  after  the  old  nature,  but  the  new].  For 
they  who  have  only  the  earthly  nature — *  are 
earthly' — do  interest  themselves  only  in  the  things 
of  the  earth  ;  and  they  that  have  the  spiritual  na- 
ture are  interested  in  the  things  of  the  Spirit.  For 
to  be  carnally-minded  is  death.  [Those  who  are 
governed  only  by  earthly  and  selfish  motives  and 


DEPRAVITY.  97 

aims  are  spiritually  dead.]  But  to  be  spiritually- 
minded  is  life  and  peace.  For  the  carnal  mind  is 
enmity  against  God.  It  is  not  subject  to  his  law, 
neither  indeed  can  be.  So  then,  they  that  are  in 
the  flesh  [or  natural  state]  can  not  please  God. 

"  But  if  the  Spirit  of  him  that  raised  up  Jesus 
Christ  from  the  dead  dwell  in  you,  he  that  raised  up 
Christ  from  the  dead  shall  also  quicken  your  mortal 
bodies  by  his  Spirit  that  dwelleth  in  youP 

Look  a  moment  at  one  or  two  of  the  points  in 
this  passage. 

The  law  can  give  knowledge  of  duty,  but  it  can 
not  beget  life.  It  can  show  us  the  evil,  but  it  can 
not  beget  the  disposition  to  overcome  the  evil.  It 
is  not  knowledge  that  men  want,  but  strength  to  do 
what  they  know.  The  man  is  a  fool  who  supposes 
that  light  is  love.  The  law  requires  love,  but  it 
can  not  beget  it.  Every  thing  begets  its  kind. 
Love  only  can  beget  love.  Hence,  Christ  crucified 
in  the  humanity  as  a  sacrifice  for  sin,  is  such  an 
exhibition  of  love  that  it  begets  love  in  believers. 
Faith  accomplishes  "  what  the  law  could  not  do." 
Love  is  life.  "  Love  is  the  fulfilling  of  the  law," 
and  hence  "  the  law  of  God  is  fulfilled  in  us  who 
walk  not  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit." 
Men  by  nature  are  morally  "dead  already,"  and 


98  DEPRAVITY. 

have  no  "  eternal  life"  unless  born  again  by  the 
Spirit  of  Holiness  in  Christ  Jesus. 

In  the  Christian  are  the  rudiments  of  a  new 
species — a  new  and  higher  type  of  the  rational 
order  of  humanity.  His  new  life  is  by  divine  in- 
terposition, but  received  in  accordance  with  his  own 
voluntary  powers — ^begotten  by  truth  and  cherished 
by  love.  The  spiritual  germ  is  implanted  and  de- 
veloped here  until  it  attains  the  resurrection  state — • 
i.  e.  overcomes  the  habitudes  of  its  earthly  body — 
then,  in  the  resurrection,  a  spiritual  body  adapted 
to  its  propensions  is  given  to  it.  "  To  every  seed 
its  own  [adapted]  body."  Christ  is  the  head  and 
the  type  of  the  new  creation  (shall  we  say  of  the 
new  species?).  Let  us  rejoice,  ray  friend.  The 
process  now  developing  in  Christian  minds  on  the 
earth,  will  reach,  in  body  and  spirit,  a  glorious  con- 
summation in  the  resurrection  of  the  just. 

Yours,  in  the  hope  that  we  shall  awake  in  his 
likeness, 


LETTER    VII. 

eeconciliation,  or  at-one-ment. 

My  Dear  Sir  : — 

You  know  that  the  Christian  doctrine  of 
atonement  is  held  confidingly  by  the  evangelical 
churches ;  but,  as  we  have  seen,  this  doctrine  is 
determinedly  rejected  by  Mr.  Parker  and  other 
skeptics,  as  it  is  likewise  by  a  portion  of  those  call- 
ing themselves  Unitarians. 

It  should  be  stated  at  the  outset  that  the  subject 
of  sacrifice  has  its  essential  relations  with  the  moral 
nature  of  man — the  conscience,  the  affections,  the 
will,  rather  than  with  the  intellect.  The  love-power 
of  sacrifice  when  appropriated  by  faith — its  rela- 
tions to  man's  moral  nature,  and  to  God's  moral 
government — is  too  profound  to  be  fally  devel- 
oped by  mere  logical  elucidation.  The  sacrifice  of 
Christ  is  a  manifestation  of  power  and  love  trans- 
ferred by  faith  to  the  consciousness  of  the  believer. 
The  skeptic  can  not  know  this.  Hence  the  main 
evidence  is  absent  in  his  case.     But  there  are  adapt- 


100      RECONCILIATION,    OR    AT-ONE-MENT. 

ations  of  the  atonement  to  imperfect  humanity — 
there  are  grounds  of  its  necessity  in  moral  govern- 
ment, which  may  be  seen  by  the  reason  ;  and  see- 
ing these,  a  reason  that  is  reverent  will  accept  the 
aid  of  faith  which  gives  us  the  substance  of  what 
the  reason  had  given  us  distinct  indications. 

We  inquire,  then,  is  there  any  thing  in  the  na- 
ture of  man  which  is  met  only  by  the  sacrifice  of 
Christ,  offered  not  for  himself,  but  for  those  who 
will  accept  its  mercy  by  faith  ? 

It  can  not  be  doubted  that  there  is  in  man  a 
consciousness  of  sin,  or  of  something  else  (call  it 
what  you  will)  that  leads  him  to  feel  the  want  of  a 
sacrifice — or  rather  that  leads  him  to  sacrifice  as  a 
means  of  reconciliation  with  God,  Since  the  world 
began  man  has  had  something  in  his  soul  that  has 
led  him  to  offer  sacrifice.  We  inquire  neither  for 
the  reason  of  the  fact,  nor  for  the  form  of  the  fact, 
but  for  the  fact  itself  ■  Men  may  call  the  fact  pro- 
pitiation, expiation,  substitution — by  any  or  all 
these  names,  still  the  thing  sought  by  the  soul  is 
pliiin: — It  is  peace  with  God,  a  mitigation  of  tJie  con- 
sciousness of  sin^  reconciliation,  at-one-ment.  Super- 
stitious usages  have  been  connected  with  sacrifice, 
and  priestcraft  has  turned  the  offering  of  the  sin- 
oppressed  soul  to  a  selfish  account ;  but  the  perver- 


EECONCILIATION,    OE   AT-ONE-MENT.      101 

sion  of  the  fact  does  Bot  ignore  the  existence  of  the 
sense  of  want  which  has  produced  in  all  ages  and 
among  all  nations,  the  various  phenomena  of  sac- 
rifices. 

The  ultimate  truth  in  the  case,  then,  is,  that 
there  is  something  in  the  human  soul  that  leads  it 
to  seek  peace  with  God  by  sacrifice.  The  form 
may  be  varied  never  so  much.  Some  may  inflict 
torture  upon  themselves  ;  some  part  with,  as  an  of- 
fering, what  they  deem  most  precious,  even  a  son 
or  a  daughter ;  some  make  a  pilgrimage  ;  some 
offer  the  first-fruits  of  grain  or  of  cattle.  What- 
ever the  form,  the  phenomena  are  all  produced  by 
the  one  want  of  the  sin-conscious  soul — a  desire 
of  peace,  or  at-one-ment  with  God, 

The  want  of  atonement  felt  in  the  soul  is  as  uni- 
versal as  the  sense  of  sin.  Man,  therefore,  as  a 
being,  naturally  seeks  reconciliation  by  sacrifice,  be- 
cause his  reason,  as  well  as  his  moral  sense,  teaches 
him  that  sin  alienates  and  separates  from  God. 

In  this  connection  notice  an  important  fact — a 
fact  which  is  evidence  not  only  of  the  fallen  and 
darkened  state  of  the  human  mind,  but  likewise  of 
the  necessity  of  revelation,  especially  of  the  revela- 
tion of  the  mercy  of  God  by  sacrifice.  While  the 
Fense  of  sin,  which  is  universal,  produces  in  men 


102      RECOXCILIATION,    OR   AT-ONE-MENT. 

the  sense  of  want  whicli  demands  a  propitiation, 
yet  to  offer  self,  or  any  object  we  can  call  our  own, 
produces  selfishness  and  pride  in  the  soul  instead 
of  benevolence,  gratitude,  and  liumility.  We  feel 
the  want  of  a  sacrifice,  but  nothing  we  possess  pro- 
duces the  effect  necessary  in  order  to  peace  of  con- 
science and  purity  of  heart.  The  man  who  goes 
upon  a  pilgrimage  to  Mecca,  or  to  any  other  shrine, 
especially  if  he  has  walked  on  his  knees  a  jjart  of 
the  way,  returns  to  his  home  a  censorious  and  self- 
righteous  spirit^  his  self-sacrifice  having  led  him 
away  from  humility,  and  rendered  gratitude  im 
possible.  He  can  not  he  grateful  to  God  for  a  salva- 
tion which  he  himself  has  loorhed  out  for  himself  So 
with  the  devotee  who  tortures  himself  So  in  the 
case  of  those  who  give,  as  a  propitiation,  money  or 
cattle.  The  effect  necessarily  connected  with  sacri- 
fice, when  that  sacrifice  is  made  hy  SELFyor  self,  is 
the  opposite  of  that  which  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  for 
the  sinner  is  adapted  to  produce.  The  one  pro- 
duces self-righteousness  and  self-dependence — the 
other  gratitude  and  dependence  on  God.* 

This  then  is  the  actual  condition  of  man  in  his 


*  It  is  a  sinp^ular  fact  that  Mr.  Parker  makes  out,  that  a  "  sense 
of  dcpondenco"  is  the  ultimate  idea  in  religion  (p.  18),  and  yet  dis- 
cards the  doctrine  which  alone  produces  a  sense  of  dependence. 


RECONCILIATION,    OR    AT-ONE-MENT.      103 

natural  state.  He  has  a  sense  of  sin,  and  the  ac- 
companying sense  of  sacrifice,  but  the  selfish  sac- 
rifices to  which  his  natural  want  leads,  produce  evil 
and  not  good  in  the  soul.  Instead  of  rendering  a 
man  humble  and  grateful,  the  sacrifices  prompted 
by  the  natural  want,  and  offered  by  self  for  self, 
produce  pride  and  impiety.  It  has  done  so  since 
the  beginning  of  the  world,  and  would  have  con- 
tinued to  do  so  until  the  end  of  the  world,  if  divine 
revelation  and  a  divine  sacrifice  had  not  revealed 
Christ  crucified,  which  rescues  the  soul  from  selfish 
sacrificing.  Skeptics  can  not  deny  these  facts.  If 
they  reject  the  gospel  solution  of  them,  we  defy 
them  to  furnish  any  other  that  does  not  impugn 
either  the  justice  or  the  mercy  of  God ;  and  thus 
involve  the  dif&culty  in  deeper  darkness,  rather 
than  resolve  it  by  light  and  love  revealed  in  "  the 
Lamb  slain  from  the  foundation  of  the  world,"  to 
be  "  testified  to  all  in  due  time." 

In  what  way,  then,  could  the  natural  want  of 
propitiation  be  met,  and  the  soul  receive  spiritual 
good  by  the  sacrifice  ? 

We  probably  have  anticipated  the  answer  to  this 
question.  But  let  us  look  at  one  or  two  particulars. 
In  the  first  place,  it  is  necessary,  in  order  to  the 
formation  of  a  benevolent  character,  that  the  motive 


104      BECONCILIATION,    OR    AT-OIS  E-MENT. 

of  our  action  be  out  of  self.  What  I  do  for  another 
makes  me  more  benevolent.  "What  I  do  from 
selfish  motives  makes  me  more  selfish.  Now  the 
man  who  has  faith  in  Christ's  love-sacrifice  for  us, 
is  redeemed  from  a  selfish  motive.  He  labors  for 
Christ's  sake.  Christ's  sacrifice  moves  him.  He  is 
God-moved,  not  self  moved.  Christ  becomes  mo- 
tive both  in  the  heart  and  in  the  will.  Faith  pro- 
duces gratitude  and  good  works,  but  works  can 
never  produce  faith. 

The  sacrifice  of  Christ  then  is  a  necessary  part  of 
the  moral  system  which  includes  man  as  a  sinner. 
Without  it  the  natural  sense  of  sin  and  depend- 
ence Avorks  injury  to  the  human  soul.  With  it  the 
sense  of  sin  in  believers  is  canceled  by  a  sense  of 
reconciliation,  and  reason  and  conscience  find  rest 
by  trust  in  the  divine  sacrifice.  A  sense  of  depend- 
ence, now,  places  the  soul  in  its  true  position.  It 
depends  not  on  itself,  but  on  the  love  of  God  mani- 
fested in  Christ's  sacrifice.  And  every  time  we 
pray  in  his  name  the  sense  of  dependence  and 
gratitude  is  renewed  in  the  mind. 

The  introductory  dispensation  of  Moses  pro- 
duced, so  far  as  an  initiatory  process  of  types  and 
figures  could  produce,  the  salutary  ideas  which  are 


RECONCILIATION,    OR    AT-ONE-MENT.      105 

produced  under  tlie  Christian  dispensation  by  tlie 
sacrifice  of  Christ. 

The  faith  and  ritual  of  the  Mosaic  institution  was 
such,  that  the  sacrifice  offered  was  not  deemed  the 
property  of  the  individual,  but  as  belonging  to  the 
Lord  (Exodus,  siii.  11-16).  The  Lord  permitted 
the  redemption  by  sacrifice  of  the  first-born,  which 
belonged  to  him  by  the  most  solemn  covenant. 
The  ceremonial  was  such  that  it  was  to  the  mind  of 
the  Jew  the  Lord's  sacrifice,  while  yet  it  was  per- 
mitted to  be  offered  for  a  sin  or  a  peace-offering. 
Thus  the  idea  of  ownership  in  the  offering  was  de- 
stroyed by  the  plan  of  the  Mosaic  economy  ;  hence, 
the  concomitant  idea  of  pride  and  self  righteousness 
could  not  follow  the  offering.  The  fee  of  the  sacri- 
fice  was  in  Jehovah,  not  in  the  sinner  who  offered 
it. 

But  as  a  sense  of  sin  would  again  arise  by  re- 
newed transgression  or  omission  of  known  duty, 
hence  a  succession  of  sacrifices  was  the  burden  of 
the  old  law.  These  sacrifices,  says  the  apostle, 
could  not  make  the  comers  thereunto  perfect.  The 
renewed  sense  of  sin  required  a  renewed  sacrifice. 
The  thing  needed  to  meet  the  want  was  one  sacri- 
fice that  could  be  pleaded  perpetually,  which,  would 
thus  make  the  comers  perfect,  and  supersede  for- 

5* 


106      HECONCILIATION,   OK    AT-ONE-MENT. 

ever  the  offering  of  sacrifices  bj  the  people  of  God. 
Hence  the  whole  system  is  fulfilled  in  the  sacrifice 
of  Christ.  He  is  "  the  end  of  the  law  [of  sacrifice] 
to  every  one  that  belie veth."  "  Nor  yet  (Heb.  ix, 
25)  that  he  should  offer  himself  often,  as  the  high 
priest  entereth  into  the  holy  place  every  year  with 
the  blood  of  others  ;"  "  but  now  once  in  the  end  of 
the  dispensation  hath  he  appeared  to  put  away  sin 
by  the  sacrifice  of  himself"  Hence,  "  the  blood  of 
Christ  who  by  the  eternal  Spirit  offered  himself 
without  spot  unto  God,  will  purge  your  consciences 
from  dead  works  to  serve  the  living  God.^^ 

It  is  not  necessary  to  inquire,  as  some  have  done, 
whether  in  the  darkness  of  the  age,  the  divine 
Father  adapted  the  sacrifices  which  the  natural 
want  had  produced,  and  which  were  then  existing, 
to  the  end  of  initiating  the  one  sacrifice  offered  by 
the  eternal  Spirit,  which  would  more  perfectly 
purify  the  conscience  and  heart,  and  produce  obe- 
dience by  a  right  motive.  It  is  enough  to  know 
the  fact  that  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  does  purify  the 
heart — speaks  peace  to  the  conscience — redeems  the 
soul  from  selfish  or  dead  works — and  produces 
works  of  love  in  those  who  are  servants  of  the  liv- 
ing God. 

There  is  another  aspect  of  the  atonement  which  ia 


RECONCILIATION,    OE    AT-ONE-MENT.      107 

frequently  brought  to  view  in  the  Scriptures,  and 
which  many  consider  the  foundation  of  its  necessity. 

Man  has  an  innate  sense  of  justice  and  right. 
This  is  a  distinguishing  attribute  of  his  moral  na- 
ture. A  sense  of  responsibility  for  all  moral  action 
of  which  conscience  takes  cognizance  is  based  upon 
it.  A  sense  of  the  evil  and  desert  of  sin  arises,  in 
a  great  measure,  from  the  sense  of  justice,  which  is 
in  conflict  with  sin.  Law  is  the  development  of 
justice,  as  benevolence  is  the  development  of  love. 
Love  often  develops  itself  in  acts  which  are  superior 
to  law,  because  they  are  acts  of  self-denial  which 
the  law  or  justice  does  not  demand.  But  laws  are 
the  immutable  rules  of  the  creation,  physical  and 
moral ;  and  mercy  is  never  rightly  exercised  ex- 
cept it  be  to  bring  the  ignorant  and  erring  back  to 
light  and  law.  Justice,  then,  underlies  mercy,  and 
mercy  is  exercised  in  maintainance  of  the  principles 
of  eternal  justice.  Mercy  rises  above  the  law  only 
to  bring  back  the  transgressor  into  conformity  to  law. 

Now,  God  having  given  to  man  this  foundational 
sense  of  justice,  would  not  violate  it  by  atonement 
or  in  any  other  way.  Beside,  God  himself  pos- 
sesses the  attribute  of  justice,  and  his  moral  govern- 
ment, even  in  the  administration  of  mercy,  must 
be  based  upon  it. 


108      RECONCILIATION,    OR    AT-ONE-MENT. 

The  principle  of  justice,  then,  which  develops 
itself  in  law  can  not  be  sacrificed  to  the  power  of 
mercy  which  develops  itself  in  benevolence;  not- 
withstanding benevolence  often  rises  above  the  re- 
quirements of  law.  Nor  can  the  one  produce  the 
effects  which  the  other  does  in  the  human  mind. 
Gratitude  can  not  be  exercised  fully  for  an  action 
in  others  which  the  law  requires  of  them.  We 
'must  see  in  the  act  something  of  the  mercy  which 
produces  acts  of  personal  self-denial  for  us,  before 
gratitude  flows  spontaneously.  But  the  being  who, 
while  he  maintains  the  principles  of  justice,  exer- 
cises mercy  by  acts  of  self-denial  which  the  law 
does  not  require,  commends  liimself  both  to  the 
conscience  and  the  affections  of  moral  beings,  and 
begets  in  all  right  minds  not  only  a  sense  of  re- 
spect and  benevolence,  but  at  the  same  time  a  sense 
of  grateful  love  for  the  benefactor. 

There  are  many  who  seem  to  have  no  right  sense 
of  the  principles  of  justice  and  mercy  as  they  relate 
to  moral  government.  Tbis  state  of  mind  is  born 
of  ignorance  and  sin.  God  is  not  only  the  Father, 
especially  of  those  who  are  "born  of  the  Spirit," 
but  he  is  the  ruler  and  judge  of  men.  A  father 
may  pardon  a  son  for  an  offense  against  himself; 
but  if  he  is  a  magistrate,  and  that  son  commits  the 


BECONCILIATION,    OR    AT-ONE-MENT.      109 

same  offense  against  the  public  law,  lie  can  not  par- 
don him  without  forfeiting  his  character  as  a  ruler, 
or  impairing  the  sense  of  justice  in  the  public  mind. 

If  the  sense  of  justice  is  of  God  and  in  God,  he 
will  maintain  it  in  moral  government.  The  best 
men  have  the  strongest  sense  of  justice. 

A  proclamation  of  pardon  on  repentance  would 
render  repentance  a  selfish  act,  or  make  it  impos- 
sible. 

"  God  is  love,"  and  therefore  in  governing  the 
world  he  would  exercise  benevolence ;  but  benevo- 
lence would  be  exercised  in  such  a  manner  as  to 
maintain  the  sense  of  justice,  which  is  the  basis  of 
moral  government. 

We  desire  not  only  to  elucidate  this  subject,  but 
to  produce  positive  conviction  in  relation  to  it. 
Instead  of  reproducing  the  same  thought,  allow  me 
to  refer  you  to  the  chapters  on  law  and  atonement 
in  "  God  Eevealed  in  Creation  and  in  Christ,"  be- 
ginning with  the  second  book,  and  thence  onward 
to  the  198th  page.* 

*  It  was  my  intention,  in  printing  these  Letters,  to  introduce  as 
notes,  or  as  an  appendix,  several  quotations  from  my  previous  works 
("The  Philosophy  of  the  Plan  of  Salvation,"  and  "God  Revealed," 
etc.),  but  the  excellent  publishers  of  these  works,  Messrs.  Gould  & 
Lincoln,  of  Boston,  were  not  willing  that  such  large  extracts  should 
be  made  from  books,  the  copyright  of  which  is  owned  by  themselves. 

I  have  no  doubt  their  views  of  the  matter  are  proper ;  hence  I 


110      KECONCILIATION,    OR    AT-ONE-MENT. 

I  commend  most  heartily  the  -whole  subject  of 
law  and  atonement,  in  the  beginning  of  the  Second 
Book,  to  your  attention  (I  have  marked  the  em- 
phatic passages  in  the  volume  expressed  to  you). 
Please  read  them  with  the  conviction  in  mind,  that 
in  order  to  maintain  the  principle  of  justice  in  the 
minds  of  intelligent  beings,  God  naust  develop  and 
maintain  this  principle  in  his  own  moral  govern- 
ment. And  in  connection  with  this,  keep  in  mind 
that  benevolence,  which  is  above  law,  can  be  prop- 
erly exercised  only  to  bring  back  transgressors  to 
obedience  to  law.  As  law  is  the  only  foundation 
of  order  in  the  moral  universe,  and  of  safety  and 
happiness  to  the  creature,  benevolence  can  be  ex- 
ercised in  no  way  that  is  congTuous  with  the  sys- 
tem, except  in  the  pardon  and  restoration  of  offenders. 

Notice,  with  me,  an  outline  of  the  principles 
upon  which  this  conclusion  is  predicated. 

The  universe,  physical  and  moral,  is  founded  in 

have  quoted  but  little  of  the  passages  to  which  I  had  referred  my 
respondent.  In  one  or  two  cases  in  wliicli  the  thought  ia  necessary 
to  tlio  completeness  of  my  argument,  I  liave  reproduced  my  own 
thouglit  in  other  forms.  To  this  I  think  there  can  be  no  objection, 
as  those  able  writers,  Rev.  Dr.  Hopkins,  in  his  Lowell  Lectures,  and 
Dr.  Berg,  in  liis  Discussion  witli  Barker,  have  reproduced,  in  their 
own  words,  some  of  the  most  valuable  thought  in  my  first  volume. 
It  Ls  perhaps  due  to  myself  to  say  tliat  my  volume  was  published 
some  time  before  the  appearance  of  those  worka 


RECONCILIATION,    OR    AT-ONE-MENT.      Ill 

law  and  governed  by  law.  In  obedience  to  law 
there  is  safety  and  happiness.  Whatever  trans- 
gresses law  has  taken  the  first  step  in  the  road  to 
ruin.  Law  knows,  and  can  know,  do  pardon.  As 
life  in  any  case  is  impossible  without  obedience  to 
law,  pardon  while  the  transgressor  is  not  restored 
would  be  a  nullity  and  an  absurdity. 

Whatever  departs  from  law  secures  derangement 
in  the  beginning  and  death  in  the  end;  and  in  addi- 
tion to  its  own  aberration,  produces  derangement  in 
other  things.  If  an  orb  were  to  leave  its  sphere, 
it  would  not  only  rush  to  destruction,  but  it  would 
cross  other  orbits,  and  dash  itself  against  other 
bodies.  In  such  an  event  the  system  would  be  de- 
stroyed unless  the  deranged  body  could  be  drawn 
back  before  the  final  destruction,  and  at  the  same 
time  a  re-adjustment  be  made  of  the  derangement 
which  it  had  caused  in  the  system.  When  any 
thing  departs  from  the  rule  of  law,  it  has  no  power 
to  recover  itself  or  to  rectify  the  error.  In  the 
physical  universe  the  slightest  departure  would  un- 
balance the  attractive  forces,  and  the  tendency 
would  be  to  swifter  departure.  The  very  laws 
which  preserve  from  destruction  every  thing  in 
obedience  to  them,  hastens  and  compels  the  destruc- 
tion of  whatever  departs  from  obedience. 


112      RECONCILIATION,    OR    AT-ONE-MENT. 

So  in  the  moral  world  ;  one  sin  tends  to  produce 
anotlier.  Sin  weakens  the  moral  forces  which  hold 
the  soul  to  obedience.  Like  all  other  derange- 
ments, the  tendency  to  sin  augments  itself  by  its 
own  activity ;  hence,  in  the  moral  world,  as  in  the 
physical,  the  import  of  the  sentence  is,  "  the  soul 
that  sinneth  it  shall  die." 

Moral  transgression,  likewise,  not  only  puts  the 
soul  in  the  road  to  ruin,  but  it  deranges  other  moral 
agents.  One  sinner  causes  sin  in  others.  Sin  be- 
gets sin.  As  the  leprosy,  which  symbolized  its  in- 
fluence in  the  camp  of  Israel,  sin  is  contagious.  It 
ruins  one  while  it  infects  others. 

"  Law,  then,  is  a  necessity  of  things,  and  penalty 
is  a  necessity  of  law."  Law  is  inexorable.  Every 
transgression  tends  to  the  destruction  of  the  subject; 
while  the  subject,  by  the  transgression,  is  put  with- 
out the  pale  of  safety,  and  rendered  incapable,  in 
himself,  of  returning  or  of  compensating  for  his 
transgression. 

This  inviolability  of  moral  law  finds  a  sanction  in 
the  reason  and  conscience  of  men.  The  moral  law 
is  an  expression  of  the  will  of  God.  He  could  not, 
therefore,  permit  sin  without  permitting  a  violation 
of  his  own  will,  which  would  be  absurd.  Beside, 
if  God  is  holy  he  ought  not  to  make  a  law  which 


RECONCILIATION,   OR    AT-ONE-MENT.      113 

would  permit  sin.  No  man  will  say  that  God 
ought  to  make  a  law  that  would  allow  a  single 
transgression.  Now,  if  the  reason  and  conscience 
that  God  has  given  men  say,  and  sanction  the  say- 
ing, that  God  ought  not  to  permit  sin,  who  dare  re- 
bel against  his  moral  nature,  and  say  that  he  has 
done  so  ?  Reason  affirms,  conscience  sanctions,  and 
the  moral  law  reveals  the  same  penalty  that  is 
written  against  the  transgressor  of  every  other 
law  of  the  universe — The  transgressing  subject  shall 
die. 

Now,  then,  man  is  a  sinner.  In  gospel-enlight- 
ened lands,  he  has  not  lived  up  to  his  knowledge 
of  good ;  nor  up  to  the  demands  of  conscience ; 
nor  up  to  the  amount  of  his  ability.  He  is  a  trans- 
gressor of  the  moral  law  of  God,  and  the  penalty  of 
that  law — "  dying  thou  shalt  die" — is  against  him. 
His  moral  nature  is  deranged,  and  tending  to  the 
second  death. 

How,  now,  shall  man  be  restored  and  pardoned  ? 
How  shall  the  evil  propension  be  regenerated,  and 
the  evil  he  has  occasioned  in  others  be  balanced 
and  compensated  for?  Is  there  any  method  by 
which,  without  impairing  the  sense  of  justice,  be- 
nevolence, which  is  above  law,  may  restore  the  trans- 
gressor to  obedience,  and  arrest  the  evils  which  his 


114      KECOKCILIATION,    OR    AT-ONE-MENT. 

sin  has  occasioned  in  other  minds?  This  is  the 
problem  of  the  atonement.     Let  us  see. 

There  arc,  in  the  physical  universe  and  in  phys- 
ical and  instinctive  law,  compensations  which  are 
placed  over  against  each  other ;  and  thus  the  in- 
equalities of  the  various  systems  of  law  are  met  and 
balanced.  These  compensations  or  adjustments  are 
made  by  the  Creator ;  and  they  become  at  once  the 
evidences  of  his  wisdom  and  goodness. 

Are  there  likewise  deviations  and  compensations 
in  the  moral  universe  ?  We  can  answer  onl}^  for 
ourselves,  as  moral  beings,  and  as  we  are  related  to 
the  moral  law. 

1.  The  moral  law,  which  requires  supreme  love 
to  God  and  impartial  love  to  man,  is  the  rule  of 
reason  and  righteousness ;  and  being  the  will  of 
God,  it  is  the  obligatory  law  for  all  intelligent  and 
moral  beings.  From  this  statement  I  presume 
there  will  be  no  dissent.  Certainly  none  by  your- 
self. 

2.  Now,  accepting  the  law  as  the  rule  of  life,  it 
is  admitted  that  man  falls  below  its  requirements — 
that,  judged  by  the  law,  he  is  condemned  as  a  trans- 
gressor. He  is  guilty  in  view  of  his  own  con- 
science, knowledge,  and  ability.  He  is  likewise 
guilty  in  nature  (or,  if  you  prefer  it,  in  character), 


RECONCILIATION,    OR    AT-ONE-MENT.      115 

not  having  tlie  disposition  to  fulfill  his  duties  ac- 
cording to  the  example  of  Christ.  The  penalties  of 
the  law  arc  therefore  against  him,  and  he  can  nei- 
ther pardon  himself  nor  beget  that  love  in  himself 
which  is  the  fulfilling  of  the  law. 

3.  The  law,  then,  is  the  rule  of  life.  Man  is  be- 
low its  requirements,  and  therefore  liable  to  de- 
struction as  the  penalty  of  transgression.  He  is 
without  love  to  God — dead  already,  and  tending  to 
the  "  second  death."  Now,  is  there  any  compensa- 
tion in  the  moral  universe  for  this  aberration  of 
man  from  the  sphere  of  law  ?  Is  there  a  recupera- 
tive principle  in  the  moral  as  there  is  in  the  phys- 
ical system  of  things  ? — a  redeeming  power  adapted 
to  the  nature  of  the  case  ? 

The  thing  required  in  order  to  moral  compensa- 
tion is  that  some  being,  united  in  the  same  system  with 
man,  should  possess  a  moral  worth  rising  above  law  in 
the  same  degree  that  man  falls  below  it.  Now,  we 
postulate  that  Jesus  Christ,  by  his  sacrifice,  meets 
this  condition  in  the  equation.  The  law  can  not 
demand  the  sacrifice  of  the  innocent  for  the  guilty. 
Its  requirement  can  rise  no  higher  than  perfect 
obedience.  The  death  of  Christ,  therefore,  was 
above  law  ;  and  if  it  tended  to  honor  the  law  by 
restoring  transgressors  to  obedience,  it  accomplished 


116      EECONCILIATION,    OR    AT-ONE-MENT. 

ou  one  side  an  actual  balance  against  wliat  was  de- 
ficient on  the  other  side. 

The  question,  then,  of  vital  interest  is,  does  the 
super-merit  of  Christy  which  is  above  laiv,  practically 
■counterwork  the  demerit  of  man,  which  is  below  law? 
Now,  we  affirm  that  this  result  is  actually  and 
practically  accomplished  in  every  one  that  believes 
in  the  divine  sacrifice  of  the  Eedeemer. 

"  Love  is  the  fulfilling  of  the  law."  Christ's  sac- 
rifice was  a  love-sacrifice — a  sacrifice  produced  by 
divine  love.  The  law  required  obedience,  but 
could  not  produce  it.  It  required  love,  but  could 
not  beget  love.  The  sacrifice  of  Christ  is  a  reveal- 
ment  of  divine  love,  and  hence — as  every  thing 
begets  its  kind — by  the  love  of  God  manifest  in 
Christ,  love  for  God  in  Christ  is  begotten  in  be- 
lievers. Now,  "  if  men  love  God,  they  will  keep 
his  commandments."  Hence  the  disposition  to 
obedience  is  restored  in  the  soul  of  every  one  who 
believes  in  Christ.  Thus  the  current  of  death 
which  originated  in  Adam  is  met  and  counteracted 
by  the  Z^-current  which  originated  in  Christ.  One 
was  made  a  "  living  soul,"  that  is,  an  earthly  being 
— the  other  is  a  "  quickening,"  that  is,  life-giving 
Spirit. 

Now,  you  know  that  faith  in  Christ  disposes  men 


RECONCILIATION,    OR    AT-ONE-MENT.      117 

to  love  and  obey  him.  You  know  more  than  this. 
You  know  that  in  the  case  of  your  own  relatives, 
it  produces  peaceful  obedience  in  the  soul — it  casts 
out  sin — it  works  by  love,  and  purifies  the  heart. 

What  then,  is  the  thing  which  constitutes  the 
merit  and  power  of  the  divine  sacrifice  ?  We  an- 
swer, its  merit  is  in  its  love,  which  is  above  law.  Its 
personal  suffering  endured  for  others.  This  fact 
likewise  constitutes  its  power.  I  can  not  love  with 
the  love  of  gratitude  one  who  does  no  more  for  me 
than  the  law  requires  him  to  do.  But  when  love 
transcends  law,  and  one  rescues  me  by  a  sacrifice 
of  himself,  a  sacrifice  which  love  prompted,  but 
which  law  did  not  require,  then  my  heart,  and  the 
heart  of  every  believer  responds  by  grateful  love 
to  the  Redeemer.  Thus  "  faith  works  by  love," 
and  love  works  by  obedience. 

The  merit,  then,  is  found  in  the  sacrifice  of 
Christ,  which,  as  an  expression  of  divine  love,  re- 
stores the  transgressor  and  procures  pardon  by 
balancing  his  demerit  in  the  sight  of  the  law.  By 
this  7nerit  the  sinner  can  be  pardoned,  while  by  its 
poicer  he  is  redeemed  from  sin,  and  restored  to 
obedience. 

Thus  law  and  love  are  the  complement  of  each 
other  in  the  divine  government ;  and  Christ  came 


118      EECONCILIATION,    OR    AT-ONE-MENT. 

in  our  humanity  "  to  give  himself  a  ransom  for 
many,  that  whosoever  believeth  might  not  perish 
but  have  eternal  life." 

Yours,  for  a  life-giving  faith. 


LETTER    VIII. 

on  future  retribution. 

My  Dear  Sir  : — 

You  have  not,  I  presume,  any  distinct  im- 
pression of  the  views  of  Mr.  Parker  on  the  subject 
oi  future  retributioii.  He  frequently  refers  to  the 
subject,  but  does  not  often  announce  his  own  opin- 
ions. There  are  passages,  however,  in  which  he 
speaks  distinctly.  Such  an  one  occurs  on  page 
438  :  "  The  woes  of  sin  are  its  antidote.  Suffering 
comes  from  wrong-doing,  as  well-being  from  virtue. 
If  there  be  suffering  in  the  next  world,  it  is,  as  in 
this,  but  the  medicine  of  the  sickly  soul." 

This  is  plain.  Mr.  Parker  adopts  the  opinions 
of  those  who  are  called  Universalists  on  the  subject 
of  future  retribution.  He  is  wiser  than  those  gen- 
erally are  who  think  with  him.  He  affirms  with- 
out argument.  Others  argue,  and  in  their  argument 
reason  sees  the  fallacy. 

We  can  not  but  doubt  of  the  sincerity  of  men 
who  profess  to  find  their  religion  in  the  Bible,  and 


120  ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTIOlSr. 

yet  tell  us  they  believe  in  no  future  punisliment. 
The  Bible  can  not  be  interpreted  to  favor  such, 
views  except  by  subterfuge  -and  perversion  on  the 
part  of  the  interpreter.  Mr.  Parker,  therefore,  sel- 
dom refers  to  the  Bible  on  this  subject.  There  is 
at  least  frankness  in  the  audacity  of  the  skeptic 
who  sets  his  own  reason  above  the  reason  of  the 
Bible,  and  rejects  or  modifies  it  when  it  does  not 
accord  with  his  own  conceptions.  But  to  assume 
that  the  Bible  is  in  agreement  with  the  doctrine  of 
no  future  punishment,  is  a  suhilely  iha,t  "perverts 
the  right  ways  of  the  Lord,"  and  indicates  dishon- 
esty in  the  interpreter. 

We  shall  give  the  more  attention  to  this  subject, 
because  it  is  one  of  vital  interest  to  all  persons  who 
enjoy  the  light  of  the  gospel.  It  has  to  do  with' 
the  motives  which  deter  men  from  sin.  We  do 
not  say  that  Christians  act  in  view  of  future  retri- 
bution. Love  deters  the  Christian  from  sin.  For 
them  there  is  no  evil  in  the  future.  But  for  the 
unthankful  and  disobedient — for  those  who  abuse 
the  divine  mercy  and  harden  themselves  in  selfish- 
ness— there  is  evil  in  the  future ;  and  repentance 
with  such  is  impossible  so  long  as  they  believe 
there  is  no  future  punishment.  Convince  an  im- 
penitent man  that  sin  will  not  exclude  him  from 


ON    FUTUEE    RETRIBUTION.  121 

future  happiness — that  all  the  evil  he  will  expe- 
rience is  present  inconvenience  or  compunction  of 
conscience' — and  with  such  convictions,  repentance 
toward  God  and  faith  in  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  are 
out  of  the  question.  Every  wicked  man  is  willing 
to  take  the  sin  with  its  present  evil ;  and  as  for  the 
figment,  that  the  consequences  of  sin  will  cure  sin, 
or  remove  the  cause  of  sinning,  it  is,  as  we  shall 
see  further  on,  contrary  to  both  reason  and  the 
Scriptures. 

An  absurd  argument  is  destroyed  so  soon  as  its 
absurdity  is  made  apparent.  The  Uni versa! ist  view 
of  the  future  state,  which  Mr.  Parker  adopts,  can 
be  shown  to  be  absurd  both  by  reason  and  Scrip- 
ture. We  shall  endeavor  to  make  this  apparent, 
and  to  reach,  by  our  conclusion,  the  evil  not  only 
as  it  is  maintained  by  Mr.  Parker,  but  as  it  prevails 
in  a  wider  sense. 

You  will  notice  that  in  this  and  succeeding  chap- 
ters, and  indeed  in  all  I  have  written  on  this  sub- 
ject, I  use  the  Scripture  phrases,  without  discussing 
the  questions  at  issue  between  denominations,  in 
relation  to  what  ivill  he  the  character  of  future  punish- 
ment— I  make  no  effort  to  determine  the  mode  of 
punishment,  whether  it  be  to  sin  and  suJffer  forever, 

or  whether  the  "  second  death"  be  the  death  of  the 

6 


122  ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION. 

soul.  Archbishop  Whatelj  and  others  have  dis- 
cussed those  points.  "We  argue  only  the  question 
at  issue  with  Mr.  Parker  and  those  who,  like  him, 
believe  in  no  future  punishment ;  or,  if  there  be 
any,  that  it  is  only  disciplinary.  We  do  not  wish 
to  occupy  space  with  any  other  issue  than  the  main 
one.  The  main  question  is  not  whether  "  God  will 
destroy  the  soul  and  body  of  the  wicked  in  hell  ?" 
or  whether  he  will  permit  them  to  live  sinning  and 
suffering  forever.  The  negative  of  the  position 
that  all  men  tvill  he  saved,  is,  that  all  men  will  NOT 
he  saved.  We  believe  this  point  is  plain,  whether 
we  view  it  in  the  light  of  reason  or  of  revelation. 
The  other  question  concerning  eternal  sin  and  suf- 
fering, or  the  destruction  of  those  unfitted  for 
heaven,  admits  of  discussion,  and  whichever  way  it 
may  be  settled  by  any  one,  the  vital  doctrines  of 
the  Scripture  remain  intact.  In  either  case,  the 
finally  impenitent  never  enter  the  kingdom  of  the 
blessed. 

My  own  opinion  is,  that  while  many  expressions 
of  the  New  Testament  favor  the  doctrine  that  those 
unfitted  for  heaven  will  suffer  the  *'  second  death" 
by  the  "  destruction  of  both  soul  and  body  in 
hell,"  yet  the  specific  expression  of  the  Saviour  in 
the  25th  chapter  of  Matthew  requires  a  different  in- 


ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION.  123 

terpretation.  I  do  not  now  see  how  any  fair  exe- 
gesis will  give  any  otlier  sense  to  this  passage  than 
the  one  which  the  great  body  of  evangelical  Chris- 
tians have  received,  namely,  that  those  who  have 
rejected  Christ  and  disobeyed  his  commands,  will 
be  doomed  to  "  everlasting  punishment,"  while  the 
righteous  will  inherit  "  life  eternal."  The  difficulty 
of  construing  this  passage  in  accordance  with  the 
opinion  that  the  "  destruction  of  ungodly  men"  is 
the  destruction  of  the  soul,  is  given  with  distinct- 
ness and  discrimination  by  Professor  Post,  in  a 
recent  article  in  the  New-Englander.^  We  have 
extracted  that  part  of  this  article  which  relates  to 
the  passage  referred  to. 

In  all  discussions  relating  to  this  subject  we  use 
Scripture  phrases.  We  shall  prove  that  those  who 
die  unregenerated  will  "  never  see  life."  Whether 
they  will  be  annihilated  after  the  judgment,  or  sin 
and  suffer  forever,  we  leave  for  Mr.  Parker  and 
the  Universalists  to  determine. 

We  are  aware  that  the  intensity  and  eternity  of 
future  misery  have  sometimes  been  urged  with  a 
spirit  which  indicated  any  thing  else  in  the  polemic 
beside  a  sense  of  the  justice  of  God.  Advantage 
has  been  taken  of  this  by  bad  minds  to  create  prej  u- 

*  See  Appendix. 


124  ON    FUTUKE    RETRIBUTION. 

dice  against  evangelical  piety,  and  to  destroy  in 
the  minds  of  those  who  disobey  the  gospel  the 
salutary  imj)ression  that  without  repentance  they 
will  be  "reserved  unto  the  day  of  judgment  to  be 
punished." 

Let  us  leave,  then,  whatever  may  be  doubtful  or 
difficult  concerning  the  mere  form  of  the  doctrine 
of  future  punishment,  and  consider  the  main  ques- 
tion. We  affirm  that  neither  Sci'ipture  nor  reason 
teach  the  future  salvation  of  those  who  die  im- 
penitent ;  but  that  they  will  "perish"  in  the  "sec- 
ond death" — whatever  that  second  death  may  be. 

Notice,  first,  the  absurdity  of  any  effort  which 
seeks  to  derive  the  doctrine  of  no  future  punish- 
ment from  the  Scriptures.  By  willful  perversion, 
Universalism  might  be  tortured  out  of  Bunyan,  or 
Baxter,  or  Edwards,  much  more  readily  than  it  can 
be  out  of  the  Bible.  By  the  same  artifice  univer- 
sal damnation  may  be  proved — the  one  as  readily 
as  the  other.     Let  u^  see. 


Universal  salvation  proved  hyper-  Universal  damnation  proved  hy 

verting  the  Scriptures.  perverting  the  Scriptures. 

1st  John,  i.  9.     God  is  faithful  Joshua,  xxiv.  19.     lie  is  a  holy 

and  just  to  forgive  us  our  sins:  God,  he  is  a  jealous  God,  he  will 

and  to  cleanse  us  from  all  un-  not  forgive  your  transgressions 

rigliteousneas.  nor  your  sins. 


ON    FUTUEE    RETRIBUTION. 


125 


Universal  salvation  proved  by 
perverting  the  Scripiit/res. 

Lam.  iii.  31.     For  the  Lord  will 
not  cast  off  forever. 


Universal  damnation  proved  by 
perverting  the  Scriptures. 

1st  Chron.  xviii.  9.  If  thou 
seek  him  he  will  be  found  of 
thee ;  but  if  thou  forsake  him  he 
will  cast  thee  off  forever. 

AU  win  be  damned,  becaiise 
the  Scriptures  say — Isaiah,  xxvii 
11,  He  that  made  them  will  not 
have  mercy  on  them ;  and  he  that 
formed  them  will  show  them  no 
favor. 

The  world  wiU  be  damned,  be- 
cause the  Bible  says — They  who 
have  not  the  spirit  of  Christ  are 
none  of  his ;  and  in  another  place 
it  says  positively,  the  world  can 
not  receive  the  spirit  of  Christ — 
therefore  it  follows  that  the  whole 
world  must  inevitably  be  damned. 

All  men  will  be  damned,  be- 
cause the  Bible  teaches,  Jude  15, 
that  the  Lord  oometh  with  ten 
thousand  of  his  saints  to  execute 
judgment  upon  all  {navTuv  all 
things) ;  and  if  we  do  not  see 
judgment  executed  upon  all  now, 
yet  the  passage  says,  the  Lord 
cometh,  or  will  come,  to  execute 
judgment  on  aU  things  here- 
after. 

The  words  "  forever,"  "  everlasting,"  "  forever 
and  ever,"  occur  frequently  in  the  Scriptures,  some- 
times in  connection  with  temporal,  sometimes  witli 
spiritual  subjects.      An  attempt  has  always  been 


All  will  be  saved,  because  the 
Scriptures  say — Mai.  ii.  10,  "  Have 
we  not  all  one  father  ?  Hath  not 
one  God  created  us  ?" 


The  world  wOl  be  saved,  be- 
cause the  Bible  says,  Christ  gives 
eternal  life  to  as  many  as  the 
Father  hath  given  him;  and  in 
another  place  it  says,  the  Father 
bath  put  all  things  into  his  hands 
— so  that  the  proof  is  clear  that 
all  will  be  saved  in  Christ. 

All  men  will  be  saved,  because 
the  Bible  teaches  that  Christ  will 
reconcile  all  things  unto  himself 
— Col.  i.  20 — and  says  in  another 
place  that  we  "  see  not  now  all 
things  reconciled,"  implying  that 
aU  will  be  reconciled  hereafter. 
Here  is  universal  reconciliation 
and  salvation  plainly  proved. 


126  ON    FUTURE    RETEIBUTION. 

made  by  those  who  hold  the  views  of  Mr.  Parker, 
to  strip  these  words  of  their  usual  import,  which  is 
that  of  endless  duration.  Sometimes,  as  all  know, 
thej  are  applied  to  temporal  things,  when  tlie  com- 
mon sense  of  the  reader,  as  in  all  other  similar 
cases,  will  limit  them  by  the  nature  of  the  subject. 
"  The  everlasting  hills"  will  stand  while  time  lasts ; 
God  and  the  soul  live  when  time  dies.  When  these 
words  are  limited  in  signification,  the  limitation 
grows  out  of  the  nature  of  the  subject.  To  this  all 
agree ;  and  this  is  all  that  is  necessary  to  show  the 
absurdity  of  the  effort  to  destroy  their  import  in 
connection  with  the  future  destiny  of  the  wicked. 

THE   WORD   "  everlasting"  APPLIED  TO  EXPRESS 
THE  DURATION  OF  THE 

Happiness  of  the  Righteous.  Misery  of  the  Wicked. 

Matth.   xix.   29.     Those   that        2  Thess.  i.  8,   9.      The   Lord 

leave  all  to  follow  Christ  shall    Jesus    shall    be    revealed    from 

"  receive  an    huadred-fold,   and     heaven,    in   flaming   fire,    taking 

Bhall  inherit  everlasting  life."  vengeance  on   them  that  know 

not  God,  and  obey  not  the  gos- 
pel of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who 
shall  be  punished  with  everlast- 
INGr  destruction  from  the  presence 
of  the  Lord  and  the  glory  of  his 
power. 
Luke,  xviii.  30.     They  "  shall        Matth.  xxv.  41.     Depart  from 
receive  manifold  more    in    this    me,  yo  cursed,  into  everlasting  fire, 
present  time,  and  in  the  world  to    prepared  for  the  devil   and  his 
come,  lifo  everlasting."  angels. 


ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION. 


127 


Happiness  of  the  Righteous. 

Romans,  vi.  22.  But  now  be- 
ing made  free  from  sin  and  be- 
come servants  of  God,  ye  have 
your  fruit  unto  holiness,  and  the 
END,  everlasting  life. 


Dan.  xii.  2.  Many  of  them 
which  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the 
earth  shall  awake,  some  to  ever- 
lasting life,  and  some  to  shame 
and  everlasting  contempt. 

Matth.  XXV.  46.  These  shall 
go  away  into  everlasting  punish- 
ment, but  the  righteous  into  life 

EVERLASTING. 


Misery  of  the  Widced. 

Matth.  xviii.  8.  If  thy  hand  or 
thy  foot  offend  thee,  cut  them  off 
and  cast  them  from  thee ;  it  is 
better  for  thee  to  enter  into  life 
halt  or  maimed,  rather  than  hav- 
ing two  hands  or  two  feet  to  be 
cast  into  everlasting  ^re. 

Dan.  xii.  2.  Many  of  them 
which  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the 
earth  shall  awake,  some  to  ever- 
lasting life,  and  some  to  sham6 
and  everlasting  contempt. 

Matth.  XXV.  46.  These  shall 
go  away  into  everlasting  pun- 
ishment, but  the  righteous  into 
life  everlasting. 


THE  PHRASE  "  FOREVER  AND  EVER'  AS  APPLIED 
TO  EXPRESS  THE  DURATION  OF  THE 


Happiness  of  the  Righteous. 

Dan.  xii.  3.  They  that  turn 
many  to  righteousness  shall  shine 
as  stars  forever  and  ever. 

Rev.  xxii.  5.  The  Lord  God 
giveth  them  light,  and  they  shall 
reign  forever  and  ever. 


Misery  of  the  Wicked. 

Rev.  xiv.  11.  The  smoke  of 
their  torment  ascendeth  up  for- 
ever  and  ever,  and  they  have  no 
rest  day  nor  night. 

Rev.  XX.  10.  The  devil,  the 
beast,  and  the  false  prophet  shall 
be  tormented  day  and  night  for- 
ever and  ever. 


Mark,  now.  We  do  not  argue  from  these  tables 
tliat  either  the  existence  of  punishment  or  of  hap- 
piness is  eternal.  This  is  as  clearly  revealed  as  any 
•words  in  the  Hebrew  or  Greek  language  can  reveal 


128  ON    FUTUKE    RETRIBUTION. 

it ;  but  tliis  is  not  our  argument.  Our  proposition 
is,  that  the  destruction  of  the  wicked  will  be  as  en- 
during as  the  happiness  of  the  righteous,  because 
both  are  supported  by  precisely  the  same  proof.  If 
Mr.  Parker  and  his  friends  affirm  that  these  words 
never  mean  eternal  duration,  then  they  get  rid  of 
everlasting  punishment ;  but  they  likewise  get  rid 
of  the  everlasting  God,  and  of  the  everlasting  life 
of  the  righteous. 

If  they  say  that  they  sometimes  mean  eternal  du- 
ration, and  sometimes  limited  duration — that  the 
duration  is  to  be  inferred  from  the  nature  of  the 
subject  to  which  they  are  applied  ;  then  the  subject 
to  which  they  are  applied  is  the  same  in  both  cases, 
man — or  the  soul  of  man,  or  the  body  of  man. 
Whatever  they  may  choose  to  call  the  subject,  there 
is  no  doubt  but  that  it  is  the  same  in  both  cases. 

If  they  reject  both  of  these,  and  argue  that  the 
words  "  everlasting,"  and  "  eternal,"  and  "  forever," 
do  not  apply  to  the  soul,  but  to  the  punishment  or 
misery  of  the  soul  or  body  ;  then,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  words  do  not  apply  to  the  soul  of  the  righteous, 
but  to  the  happiness  or  joy  of  the  soul  or  body, 
and  if  misery  is  not  eternal  in  its  nature,  then  joy 
or  happiness  is  not  eternal  in  its  nature. 

Now,  whatever  these  words  mean  in  one  case. 


ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION.  129 

they  mean  the  same  in  the  other.  One  thing, 
therefore,  is  manifest,  namely,  that  the  "death"  of 
the  wicked  will  endure  as  long  as  the  "life"  of  the 
righteous.  This  truth  is  more  obvious  than  it  is  in  , 
the  proposition,  six  and  half  a  dozen  are  equal; 
for  in  the  one  case  the  number  is  expressed  in  dif- 
ferent language,  in  the  other  the  same  duration  is 
expressed  in  the  same  language. 

If  the  Universalist  can  succeed  in  proving  that 
the  punishment  of  the  wicked  will  end ;  he  has  at 
the  same  time  proved  that  the  happiness  of  the 
righteous  will  end ;  because  precisely  the  same 
words  and  phrases  used  to  express  the  one  are  used 
to  express  the  other.  Thus  the  dilemma  is  perfect, 
and  one  from  which  there  is  no  possible  escape — 
that  so  fast  and  so  far  as  Mr.  Parker  is  able  to  de- 
stroy, in  the  minds  of  the  wicked,  the  fear  of  ever- 
lasting punishment,  he  destroys  at  the  same  time,  in 
the  minds  of  all  that  believe  him,  the  hope  of  ever- 
lasting happiness  ;  because  the  proof  which  sustains 
the  one  is  the  same  that  sustains  the  other  ;  so  that 
if  one  fails,  both  fail — if  one  stands,  both  stand — 
and  the  duration  of  the  one  must  remain  the  same 
as  the  duration  of  the  other.  Thus,  like  blind 
Samson  in  the  temple  of  the  uncircumcised  Philis- 
tines, if  Mr.  Parker  could  succeed  in  subverting  the 


130  ON    FUTUKE    RETRIBUTION. 

pillars  of  the  temple  of  truth,  the  wreck  would  fall 
upon  his  own  head. 

There  are  but  two  ways  by  which  it  is  possible 
to  express  truth  in  language.  The  same  truth  may 
be  asserted  affirmatively  and  negatively,  and  when 
a  proposition  is  proved  affirmatively  and  nega- 
tively, it  is  not  possible  to  make  it  either  stronger 
or  plainer. 

Now,  the  "  everlasting  punishment"  of  the  im- 
penitent is  not  only,  as  proved  above,  repeatedly 
affirmed  in  the  word  of  God  ;  but  it  is  likewise  as- 
serted in  a  negative  form,  a  form  by  which  the 
existence  of  God  and  the  happiness  of  the  righteous 
are  also  expressed.  In  relation  to  God  it  is  written, 
"  Thy  dominion  shall  not  pass  away."  In  relation 
to  the  righteous,  they  shall  receive  "a  crown  of 
glory  that  fadeth  not  &waj"  In  relation  to  the 
wicked,  consider  the  following : 

"  He  that  believeth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see  life, 
but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him." 

The  blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost  "  shall 
not  be  forgiven  unto  men,  neither  in  this  world,  nei- 
ther in  the  world  to  comey 

"  In  hell  he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  being  in  torment" 
*'  Between  us  and  you  there  is  a  great  gulf  fixed, 
80  that  those  who  would  pass  from  hence  to  you 


ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION,  131 

can  not,  neither  can  tliej  pass  to  us  who  would  come 
from  thence." 

"  Their  worm  dieth  not,  and  their  fire  is  not 
quenched.^^ 

"  Without  holiness  no  mao  shall  see  the  Lord." 

"  For  if  ye  believe  not  that  I  am  he  ye  shall  die 
in  your  sinsJ^ 

Tlie  truth  in  relation  to  this  topic  is,  that  the  same 
words  which  are  applied  in  the  Bible  to  teach  the 
eternity  of  God  and  the  eternity  of  happiness,  are 
applied  to  teach  the  eternity  of  that  "  destruction" 
which  shall  come  upon  the  wicked.  They  are  the 
strongest  words  and  phrases  which  can  be  used  in 
any  language  ;  and  all  competent  interpreters  agree 
that  their  first  import  is  eternal.  And  in  addition 
to  this,  the  same  truth  is  taught  not  only  affirm- 
atively but  negatively  ;  so  that  the  everlasting  pun- 
ishment of  the  wicked  is  proved  in  the  strongest 
way,  and  in  all  the  ways  that  human  language  can 
prove  any  truth. 

The  Universalists  adopt  a  similar  method  of 
interpretation  in  order  to  escape  the  force  of  the 
figurative  language  used  in  the  New  Testament. 
Because  the  figures  which  relate  to  future  punish- 
ment had  a  local  and  temporal  origin,  they  infer 
that  they  have  only  a  local  and  temporal  import. 


132  ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION. 

The  word  translated  hell  they  find  originally  refer- 
red to  the  valle}^  of  the  sons  of  Hinnom,  near  Jeru- 
salem ;  hence  they  confine  the  figure  to  its  fact, 
and  thus  destroy  the  end  for  which  figures  were 
made.  Mr.  Parker  has  not  told  us  whether  he 
adopts  the  reasoning  of  those  who  believe  with  him 
in  this  matter,  but  as  he  adopts  their  conclusions, 
it  is  fair  to  infer  he  adopts  their  reasons.  Now,  if 
the  force  of  figures  is  to  be  destroyed  ,on  one  side 
of  the  argument,  it  should  be  on  the  other;  then, 
supposing  this  reasoning  to  be  true,  there  is  neither 
a  heaven  nor  a  hell.  The  word  heaven  is  derived 
from  a  word  which  in  its  original  import  signified 
the  atmosphere  or  the  firmament ;  and  the  import 
of  the  word  paradise  is  a  garden.  In  both  cases  the 
words  which  signify  heaven  and  hell  are  educed 
from  things  temporal  and  local  in  their  nature.  If 
one  must  be  divested  of  its  meaning,  which  signifies 
a  state  of  future  punishment,  then  the  other  must 
be  divested  of  its  import,  which  signifies  a  state  of 
future  happiness.  We  should  then,  according  to 
this  method  of  interpretation,  have  neither  a  hell 
nor  a  heaven. 

This  interpretation  strike^  at  the  foundation  of 
revelation.  It  would  be  impossible,  if  such  perver- 
sions were  permitted,  for  any  revelation  ever  to  be 


ON    FUTUEE    EETRIBUTION.  133 

made  to  man.     Man  can  learn  the   unknown  only 
by  figures  and  parables  drawn  from  the  known. 

"  For  what  of  God  above  or  man  below  ? 
What  can  we  reason  but  from  what  we  know  ?" 

No  terms  are  used  in  the  Bible  to  teach  us  the 
existence  of  a  future  world,  or  the  condition  of  the 
soul  in  that  world,  which  are  not  derived  in  some 
way  from  things  that  pertain  to  the  present  state 
of  existence.  The  Saviour  always  spake  in  par- 
ables and  figures  (Matt.  xiii.  84),  because  he  had 
to  illustrate  the  unknown  by  what  was  known  to 
his  hearers.  The  individual,  therefore,  who  en- 
'deavors  to  destroy  in  the  minds  of  his  hearers  the 
application  of  these  figures  to  another  life,  destroys, 
so  far  as  he  succeeds,  the  very  effect  which  Christ 
designed  to  accomplish  by  using  them.  This 
method  of  interpretation  proves  there  is  no  hell, 
but  it  proves  likewise  that  there  is  no  devil,  no 
angel,  no  heaven,  no  God  ! 

The  general  tenor  of  the  New  Testament — the 
general  acceptation  of  the  words  and  phrases  used 
by  Christ  and  his  apostles,  as  well  as  the  effects 
produced  by  their  ministry,  render  it  certain  that 
they  taught  men  that  eternal  life  depended  on  rec- 
onciliation to  God  as  he  is  manifested  in  Jesus  Christ. 


134  ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION. 

Notice  the  evidence  of  this  in  the  following  pas- 
sages. 

The  points  of  the  following  passages  are  directly 
against  Parkerism.  "  Fear  not  them  which  kill  the 
body,  but  are  not  able  to  kill  the  soul,  but  rather 
fear  him  which  is  able  to  destroy  both  soul  and 
body  in  hell." 

John  V.  25-29.  "Marvel  not  at  this,  for  the  hour 
is  coming  in  the  which  all  that  are  in  their  graves 
shall  hear  his  voice ;  and  shall  come  forth,  they 
that  have  done  good  unto  the  resurrection  of  life ; 
and  they  that  have  done  evil  unto  the  resurrection 
of  damnation. 

The  judgment  is,  by  the  sacred  writers,  put  in 
order  after  death,  and  the  resurrection  of  the  dead. 

Heb.  vi.  2.  "  The  doctrine  of  baptisms,  and  of 
the  laying  on  of  hands,  and  of  the  resurrection  of 
the  dead,  and  of  eternal  judgment." 

Heb.  ix.  27.  "  And  as  it  is  appointed  unto  men 
once  to  die,  but  after  this  the  judgment;  so  Christ  was 
once  offered  (or  died  once),  and  unto  them  which 
look  for  Mm,  shall  he  appear  the  second  time,  with- 
out sin  unto  salvation." 

2  Tim.  iv.  7,  8.  "  I  have  fought  a  good  fight,  I 
have  finished  my  course,  I  have  kept  the  faith ; 
henceforth  there  is  laid  up  for  me  a  crown  of  right- 


ON    FUTUKE    RETRIBUTION.  1S5 

eousness,  whicli  tbe  Lord,  the  righteous  judge,  will 
give  me  at  that  day  ;  and  not  to  me  only,  hut  unto 
all  them  also  that  love  his  appearing.''^  Was  this 
righteous  judgment  when  Paul  would  be  crowned 
with  "  all  that  loved  Christ's  appearing,"  or  "  all 
them  that  looked  for  him"  to  be  at  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem  ?  Or  was  it  then  taking  place  ?  Ei- 
ther idea  is  an  absurdity. 

2  Tim.  iv.  1.  "I  charge  thee,  therefore,  before 
God  and  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  shall  judge 
the  quick  piving]  and  the  dead,  at  his  appearing 
and  his  kingdom." 

2  Pet.  ii.  7.  "  But  the  heavens  and  the  earth 
which  are  now,  by  the  same  word  are  kept  in  store, 
reserved  unto  fire,  against  the  day  of  judgment  and 
perdition  of  ungodly  men." 

By  looking  at  the  preceding  verses  it  will  be  seen 
that  Peter  is  speaking  of  the  physical  earth,  affirming 
its  destruction  or  dissolution  once  by  water,  and  its 
final  change  or  dissolution  by  fire ;  at  which  time  will 
be  the  day  of  judgment  and  the  "perdition  of  un- 
godly men."  Observe,  he  says  the  present  earth 
is  ^^  kept  in  store,  reserved  unto  fire  against  the  day 
of  judgment  and  perdition  of  ungodly  men."  How 
could  language  make  the  truth  plainer,  that  the  day 
of  judgment  and  perdition  of  ungodly  men  will  be 


f86  ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION. 

at  the  time  when  this  earth,  shall  be  changed  by' 
fire  ? 

2  Peter,  ii.  4,  9.  "  The  Lord  knoweth  how  to  de- 
liver the  godly  out  of  temptation,  and  to  reserve 
the  unjust  unto  the  day  of  judgment,  to  be  pun- 
ished." 

Are  the  unjust  rewarded  and  punished  as  they 
go  along,  and  reserved  beside  unto  (not  a  day,  nor 
this  day,  nor  all  days,  but)  the  day  of  judgment,  to 
be  punished  ? 

Matth.  xii.  32.  "  "Whosoever  speaketh  a  word 
against  the  Son  of  man,  it  shall  be  forgiven  him. 
But  whosoever  speaketh  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  it 
shall  not  be  forgiven  him,  neither  in  this  world  nor 
in  the  world  to  come." 

John,  iii.  16.  "  For  God  so  loved  the  world  that 
he  gave  his  only-begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  be- 
lieveth  in  him  should  not  perish,  but  have  everlast- 
ing life."  If  this  does  not  imply  that  whosoever 
does  not  believe  in  him  shall  perish  and  not  have 
everlasting  life,  then  there  is  no  meaning  in  lan- 
guage. 

John,  vi.  54.  "  Whosoever  eateth  my  flesh  and 
drinkcth  my  blood  hath  eternal  life,  and  I  will 
raise  him  up  at  the  last  day."  What  does  this  im- 
ply, if  Christ  did  not  deceive  his  disciples  ? 


ON    FUTUEE    RETRIBUTION.  137 

Acts,  xxiv.  25.  "  And  as  Paul  reasoned  of 
righteousness,  temperance,  and  judgment  to  come, 
Felix  trembled."  Was  it  a  judgment  that  had 
already  come,  or  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  that 
made  a  Roman  governor  tremble  ? 

1  Peter,  iv.  18.  "  And  if  the  righteous  scarcely  be 
saved,  where  shall  the  ungodly  and  the  sinner  ap- 
pear ?"  Easily  answered,  says  Mr.  Parker.  They 
will  appear  in  heaven,  with  the  righteous  who  are 
scarcely  saved. 

Matt.  xxvi.  24.  "  It  had  been  good  for  that  man 
he  had  not  been  born."  How  could  this  be,  if 
Judas  went  to  heaven  at  death  ?  If  the  doctrine 
that  Mr.  Parker  preaches  be  true,  Judas  got  to 
heaven  before  Jesus. 

'  He  with  a  cord  outwent  his  Lord, 
And  got  to  heaven  first." 

Luke,  X.  42.  "  But  one  thing  is  needful,  and 
Mary  hath  chosen  that  good  part  that  shall  never 
he  taken  away  from  herP  Will  those  who  do  not 
choose  it  have  the  good  part  and  the  one  thing 
needful,  which  shall  never  be  taken  away  from 
them  ? 

James,  i.  15.  "  Then  when  lust  hath  conceived, 
it  bringeth  forth  sin :  and  sin,  when  it  is  finished. 


138  ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION. 

bringetli  forth  deathP  Mr.  Parker  and  the  Univer- 
salists  say  that  when  sin  is  finished  it  bringeth 
forth  life.     "Which  is  right  ? 

John,  viii.  51.  "  Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you 
(mark  it)  if  a  man  keep  my  sayings  he  shall  never 
see  death."  Does  this  mean  the  first  or  the  second 
death — death  of  the  body  or  of  the  soul  ? 

It  is  not  doubted  by  any  well-informed  person 
that  Christ  and  his  apostles  used  the  w^ords  and 
phrases  which  those  who  heard  them — those  to  whom 
they  wrote,  would  understand  as  teaching  the  fu- 
ture punishment  of  the  wicked.  They  either  taught 
what  they  believed  on  this  subject,  or  they  willfully 
deceived  the  people.  They  not  only  used  the 
words  which  the  Jews  used  to  designate  future 
punishment,  but  they  were  even  careful  that  the 
Gentiles  should  not  mistake  their  meaning.  Hence 
Paul  speaks  of  '•  blackness  of  darkness,"  and  Peter 
uses  the  word  "  Tartarus"  to  convey  the  same  idea. 

The  whole  form  and  pressure  of  the  apostolic 
teaching  represent  themselves  and  those  who  heard 
them  as  acting  under  a  deep  sense  of  responsibility 
in  regard  to  the  future.  "  We  must  all  stand  before 
the  judgment-seat  of  Christ."  "Knowing  the  ter- 
rors of  the  Lord,  we  persuade  men."  They  "  warned 
every  man  night  and  day  with  tears." 


ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION.  139 

Some  who  heard  them  "  trembled  ;"  others  cried 
out  "  Men  and  brethren,  what  shall  we  do  ?"  And 
all  believers  took  up  their  cross  daily  and  followed 
Christ — all  of  them  to  persecution,  and  many  of 
them  to  the  flames. 

Now,  in  conclusion  of  this  long  letter,  I  do  not 
know  that  a  vindication  of  the  Scriptures  is  neces- 
sary in  your  case,  and  with  Mr.  Parker  it  would 
have  little  influence.  But  there  are  others  that  it 
may  save  from  a  leap  into  the  darkness  of  skepti- 
cism ;  and  we  offer  the  vindication  as  a  basis  of 
the  rational  exposition  which  will  ensue. 


LETTER    IX. 

RATIONAL  EXPOSITION  OF  PROBATION  AND  RETRI- 
BUTION. 

My  Dear  Sir  : — 

The  reasonings  of  those  who  reject  the  au- 
thority of  Scripture  while  they  teach  the  salvation 
of  all  men,  are  usually  predicated  upon  what  ihey 
assume  to  be  the  attributes  of  God  and  the  paren- 
tal character  of  God.  Their  proposition  is  as  fol- 
lows :  "  God  is  love."  He  is  infinitely  wise,  infinitely 
good,  and  infinitely  powerful.  He  must,  therefore, 
have  designed  from  the  beginning  the  greatest  good 
of  all  his  creatures,  and  as  he  has  power  to  execute 
the  designs  which  his  love  prompts  and  his  wisdom 
devises,  therefore  (they  infer)  the  whole  family  of 
man  will  be  saved. 

In  one  sense  this  proposition  is  true  ;  but  they 
give  it  a  false  sense,  and  draw  from  it  a  false  infer- 
ence. The  first  fallacy  is  in  the  method  of  their 
reasoning,  which  must  of  necessity  produce  false 
results.     They  start  with  the  a  jpriori  method,  by 


PEOBATION    AND    RETRIBUTION.      141 

forming  in  their  own  minds  a  conception  of  what 
they  choose  to  imagine  the  nature  and  attributes  of 
God  ought  to  be,  and  then  infer  results  from  their 
own  suppositions.  Now,  every  one  that  knows  any 
thing  about  the  subject  knows  that  the  a  posteriori 
method,  or  reasoning  from  effects  to  their  causes — 
i.  e.,  induction  from  the  works  of  God  and  the  "Word 
of  God — is  the  only  method  by  which  we  can  rea- 
son with  any  certainty  concerning  what  the  love  of 
God  is,  or  what  acts  that  love  would  prompt  him 
to  accomplish.  One  man  may  assume  that  God  is 
love,  and  another  that  he  is  a  God  of  vengeance ; 
and  the  reasoning  of  both  concerning  what  love  is, 
and  what  vengeance  is,  will  be  mere  idle  or  wicked 
imaginations  from  beginning  to  end,  unless  they 
define  what  these  words  mean  when  applied  to 
God,  by  referring  to  what  God  does  in  nature  and 
providence,  and  what  he  says  in  revelation.  Na- 
ture and  revelation  both  proceed  from  God,  and 
must,  when  rightly  interpreted,  bear  true  and  har- 
monious testimony  to  his  nature  and  attributes. 
The  character  of  the  First,  or  of  any  cause,  not 
cognizable  by  the  senses,  can  be  known  only  bj 
the  effects  which  it  produces.  Vain  talkers,  by 
forming  in  their  own  minds  a  character  for  God, 
and  determining,   ct  priori,  what  kind  of  religion 


142      PROBATION    AND   RETRIBUTION. 

God  ought  to  give,  and  then  forcing  nature  and 
the  Bible  to  coincide  with  their  speculations,  has 
given  rise  to  more  injurious  heresies  than  all  other 
causes  combined. 

A  false  method  must  necessarily  lead  to  a  false 
conclusion.  By  this  method  an  individual  would 
reason  as  follows :  God  is  infinitely  good  and  infi- 
nitely powerful.  As  he  is  infinitely  good,  he  would 
not  desire  to  create  his  creatures  subject  to  any  evil 
whatever ;  and  as  he  is  infinitely  powerful,  he  can 
accomplish  all  his  purposes,  therefore  all  his  crea- 
tures will  be  free  from  all  evil,  and  perfectly  happy 
during  their  whole  existence.  But  this  speculation 
would  lead  him  into  direct  falsehood.  His  reason- 
ings from  the  supposed  character  of  God  would  be 
contradicted  both  by  nature  and  revelation.  And 
as  God  is  forever  the  same,  the  same  method  of 
reasoning  will  forever  lead  to  falsehood  as  its  result. 

Let  us,  by  a  better  logic,  endeavor  to  reach  a 
result  more  in  accordance  with  experience  and  the 
Bible.  The  Scriptures  affirm  that  "  God  is  love," 
and  as  the  results  which  skeptics  deduce  from  their 
own  assumptions  on  this  subject  are  contradicted 
both  by  natural  and  revealed  truth,  the  vital  ques- 
tions arise,  What  is  the  love  of  God  ?  and,  In  what 
manner  is  the  love  of  God  manifested?     The  Scrip- 


PROBATION    AND    RETRIBUTION.      143 

tures  teacli  "  God  is  love,"  "  Our  God  is  a  consum- 
ing fire,"  "  His  name  is  holy."  The  living  crea- 
tures before  the  throne,  full  of  eyes  within,  denoting 
profound  and  pervading  intelligence,  cry  continu- 
ally, "Holy,  holy,  holy,  is  the  Lord  God  Al- 
mighty." Holiness  is  applied  to  God  more  em- 
phatically, more  frequently,  and  in  a  greater  variety 
of  language,  than  any  other  word  in  the  Scriptures. 
The  love  of  God,  then,  is  holy  love,  or  love  of  holi- 
ness. Now,  if  holy  love  is  the  character  of  God, 
then  his  character  is  directly  opposed  to  sin.  It  is 
a  truism  that  God  must  be  opposed  by  nature  to 
whatever  is  opposed  to  his  nature.  It  belongs  to 
the  nature  of  things,  that  just  in  proportion  as  any 
being  loves  one  thing,  he  is  opposed  to  that  which 
is  its  opposite.  Hence  it  follows  that  God  can  not 
love  holiness  without  hating  sin,  just  in  proportion 
to  his  love  of  holiness.  The  principle  is  so  obvious 
that  every  sane  mind  will  assent  to  it.  This  truth 
is  not  only  matter  of  principle,  but  it  is  matter  of 
fact.  "We  know  the  more  holy — the  more  like  God 
a  Christian  becomes,  the  more  he  hates  sin.  It  is 
likewise  matter  of  necessity,  because  sin  is  the  op- 
posite of  holiness,  and  love  is  the  opposite  of  hatred. 
It  is  likewise  matter  of  revelation  ;  Jesus  said,  "  If 
a  man  love  the  one  he  will  hate  the  other,  ye  can 


144      PROBATION    AND    RETRIBUTION. 

not  serve  God  and  mammon."  From  tliese  premises 
then,  it  follows,  that  the  more  any  being  loves  holi- 
ness, the  more  he  hates  sin  ;  and  the  conclusion  fol- 
lows incontrovertibly  and  eternally,  that  as  God  has 
infinite  love  for  holiness,  h^e  is  infinitely  opposed 
to  sin. 

If,  then,  God's  nature  is  holy  love,  how  would 
the  love  of  God  be  manifested  toward  the  human 
family,  who  are  sinners?  The  answer  is  plain  in 
two  respects — (1)  It  would  be  manifested  in  a  man- 
ner consistent  with  the  nature  and  wants  of  man ; 
and  (2)  it  would  be  manifested  in  a  manner  adapted 
to  turn  man  from  sin  to  holiness.  Man  can  find 
happiness  only  in  holiness.  God  is  love,  and  would 
seek  man's  happiness  only  by  making  him  holy. 
There  is  a  physical  necessity  in  the  one  case,  and  a 
moral  necessity  in  the  other.  There  is,  first,  the 
necessity  of  nature.  The  beaver  is  so  constituted, 
that  he  finds  his  happiness  in  the  water ;  and  if  he 
were  by  some  means  thrown  upon  the  land,  no 
benefit  could  be  conferred  upon  him  that  would 
make  him  happy,  and  answer  the  ends  of  his  na- 
ture, only  that  he  should  be  led  back  to  the  water. 
His  constitution  was  such,  that  no  other  benefit 
would  do  him  permanent  good.  If  a  physician 
were  called  to  see  a  patient  who  had  a  cancer  on 


PEOBATION    AND    RETRIBUTION.      145 

his  breast,  the  only  thing  to  be  done  would  be  to 
cut  it  out  from  the  roots.  The  physician  might  give 
palliatives,  so  that  the  patient  would  have  less  pain 
— or  he  might  make  his  patient  believe  it  was  no  can- 
cer— or  forget  that  he  had  a  cancer  near  his  vitals  ; 
but  if  the  phj^sician  were  to  do  this  instead  of  re- 
moving the  evil,  he  would  be  a  wicked  man  and  the 
enemy  of  his  patient.  The  man's  case  was  such, 
that  the  only  favor  which  could  be  conferred  upon 
him  would  be  to  cut  out  the  cancer.  Now  all  agree 
that  sin  is  the  great  evil  of  the  soul  of  man.  Noth- 
ing can  make  man  spiritually  happy  here,  or  fit 
him  for  happiness  hereafter,  but  the  removal  of  sin 
from  his  nature.  Sin  is  the  plague-spot  on  the  soul 
which,  destroys  its  peace,  and  threatens  its  destruc- 
tion unless  removed.  It  is  therefore  certain  that  if 
the  love  of  God  were  manifested  toward  man,  it 
would  be  in  turning  man  from  sin,  which  produces 
misery,  to  holiness  which  produces  happiness. 

The  question  that  remains  is,  in  what  way,  con- 
sistently with  the  nature  of  man,  would  the  love  of 
God  be  manifested  in  using  means  and  influences  to 
turn  men  from  sin  to  holiness  ? 

All  revelation,  as  well  as  philosophy  and  expe- 
rience, teach  that  man  is  a  sinner ; — but  God  holy. 

Now,  if  God  is  holy  and  man  is  a  sinner,  two  things 

7 


146       PKOBATION    AND    RETRIBUTION. 

follow  of  course.  First  that  the  will  of  man  differs 
from  the  will  of  God  ;  second,  that  God  desires  the 
will  of  man  should  be  conformed  to  his  will.  The 
question  then  arises,  by  what  method  would  God's 
goodness  be  manifested  in  influencing  the  will  of 
man  to  accord  with  his  own  will  as  revealed  to  us 
in  reason  and  the  Bible  ?  The  answer  to  this  ques- 
tion is  obvious,  both  from  reason  and  revelation. 

The  will  of  man  can  be  influenced  but  in  two 
ways,  viz.,  by  compulsion  and  by  motives.  A  man 
might  be  forced  to  sign  a  deed,  or  say  his  prayers, 
or  to  obey  by  external  action  some  commandment ; 
yet  his  acts  would  have  no  moral  character.  The 
only  way  that  a  man's  will  can  be  moved,  and  he 
continue  a  moral  agent,  is  by  motives.  The  will 
of  man  never  acts  morally  except  in  view  of  motives. 
It  follows,  then,  that  as  it  is  God's  desire  that  man, 
as  a  free  agent,  should  love  and  obey  him — the  evi- 
dence of  his  goodness  is  just  in  proportion  to  the 
motives  which  he  has  presented  to  turn  him  from 
evil  to  good.  For  it  being  true  that  the  will  of 
man  in  his  present  condition  may  be  influenced  to 
good  or  evil  by  motives — and  it  being  likewise  true 
that  sin  is  an  evil  which  destroys  the  happiness  or 
life  of  the  soul — then  it  is  obvious  that  that  being 
manifests  the  most  goodness,    who    presents    the 


PROBATION    AND    EETRIBUTION.      147 

strongest  motives  to  man,  as  a  free  agent — to  deter 
liim  from  sin  and  influence  him  to  holiness ;  and 
that  is  a  wicked  being,  and  the  enemy  of  God  and 
man,  who  destroys  the  motives  which  would  influ- 
ence men  from  sin  to  holiness. 

Further,  the  soul  is  so  constituted  that  it  can  be 
influenced  by  motives  in  two  ways,  viz.,  by  address- 
ing its  hopes  and  its  fears.  Now,  if  God  has  so 
constituted  the  soul,  that  it  can  be  influenced  by 
motives  from  evil  to  good  in  these  two  ways,  it  is 
conclusive  evidence  of  his  goodness  that  he  has  in 
both  these  ways  used  means  to  influence  the  minds 
of  his  creatures.  And  the  stronger  the  motives 
thus  presented,  the  stronger  the  evidence  of  the 
goodness  of  God.  Now,  from  these  premises,  mark 
the  motives  which  God  has  set  before  sinners  in 
the  Bible.  To  deter  them  from  sin,  God  has  pre- 
sented for  their  consideration  the  everlasting  pun- 
ishment of  devils  and  disobedient  sinners ;  and  to 
influence  them  to  good,  he  has  set  before  them  the 
everlasting  blessedness  of  those  who  repent,  and 
love  and  obey  him.  Both  of  these  being  motives 
alike  designed  to  influence  men  from  sin  to  holi- 
ness, the  man  who  denies  the  existence  of  a  hell, 
denies  the  evidence  of  the  goodness  of  God  as  truly 
as  the  man  who  denies  the  existence  of  heaven. 


148      PEOBATION    AND    RETRIBUTION. 

Everlasting  punishment  and  the  perdition  of  un- 
godly men,  as  tbe  consequence  of  sin,  and  involving 
suffering  in  proportion  to  tlieir  sins,  is  the  greatest 
motive  that  can  be  addressed  to  men  to  deter  them 
from  evil ;  and  everlasting  life  and,  happiness  the 
greatest  that  can  be  presented  to  induce  them  to 
good. 

In  presenting  these  motives,  God  has  given  the 
highest  evidence  of  his  goodness  and  love  to  his 
creatures ;  because  he  has  presented  infinite  motives 
to  induce  them  to  heaven  and  happiness  ;  and  pre- 
sented them  in  every  way  by  which  they  can  affect 
the  will.  On  the  one  side  there  is  the  everlasting 
punishment  of  hell,  as  the  consequence  of  sin,  and 
on  the  other  the  blessedness  of  heaven,  as  the  con- 
sequence of  holiness,  through  the  mercy  of  Christ ; 
and  he  that  will  continue  to  disobey  God,  notwith- 
standing these  motives,  deserves  to  go  to  hell,  and 
must  go  there  fi'om  the  necessity  of  the  case,  be- 
cause no  greater  motives  than  everlasting  punish- 
ment and  everlasting  happiness  can  be  presented 
to  influence  the  will  of  an  intelHgent  free  agent; 
and  no  greater  kindness  can  be  manifested  to  move 
the  heart  than  the  voluntary  sacrifice  of  Jesus  for 
man.  If  the  sinner  will  not  repent  and  love  God, 
in  view  of  these,  nothing  but  physical   force  re- 


PROBATION    AND    RETRIBUTION.      149 

mains,  and  God  will  never  force  sinners  bj  phys- 
ical means  to  heaven  and  happiness. 

We  do  not  design  to  say  that  the  fear  of  pun- 
ishment is  a  motive  which  induces  Christians  to 
obey.  "  The  love  of  Grod  casteth  out  fear."  There 
is  no  punishment  for  the  children  of  God,  therefore 
they  have  nothing  to  fear.  It  is  for  those  who  dis- 
obey and  pervert  God's  truth  to  fear  hell.  God  has 
told  them  the  consequence  of  their  sin  in  order 
that  they  may  be  arrested  in  their  course  of  trans- 
gression. Before  them  in  the  way  to  hell  stands 
the  angel  of  justice,  holding  up  the  holy  law,  in 
which  it  is  written,  "  Eepent  or  perish."  Behind 
them,  in  the  way  to  heaven,  stands  the  divine  Sa- 
viour, crying,  "  Turn  ye,  turn  ye — for  why  will  ye 
die  ?"  A  sense  of  evil  and  danger  arrests  the  sin- 
ner— ^love  reforms  and  guides  the  saint. 
_  Man  is  a  being  of  hopes  and  fears,  and  God  has 
addressed  him  as  such  in  the  Bible  ;  and  it  can  not 
be  doubted  that  if  there  were  no  motives  in  the 
gospel  addressed  to  the  fears  of  men  to  turn  them 
from  evil,  that  God  might  have  influenced  men  in 
one  way  which  has  not  been  done.  Consequently,  by 
denying  the  existence  of  everlasting  punishment, 
Mr.  Parker  denies  that  God  has  presented  infinite 
motives  to  deter  men  from  sin ;  instead,  therefore, 


150      PROBATION    AND    KETRIBUTION. 

of  showing  the  infinite  goodness  of  God,  lie  makes 
a  direct  attack  upon  the  goodness  of  Jehovali  ;  and 
an  attack  which,  so  far  as  successful,  destroys  the 
power  of  the  gospel,  by  destroying  the  motives  by 
which  God  would  influence  men  to  repentance. 
And  this  is  done  notwithstanding  that  terrible  ana- 
thema which  God  has  thundered  in  the  ears  of  all 
those  who  pervert  his  truth — "  If  any  man  preach 
any  other  gospel  unto  you  than  that  ye  have  re- 
ceived— let  him  he  accursed^ 

The  existence  of  future  punishment  and  "  ever- 
lasting destruction,"  is  an  evidence  of  the  goodness, 
justice,  and  wisdom  of  God  :  of  goodness,  in  that 
it  is  a  motive  to  prevent  sin  and  turn  men  from  evil ; 
of  justice,  in  that  it  is  the  righteous  doom  of  irre- 
claimable sinners ;  and  of  wisdom,  in  that  God 
can  thus  make  the  penalty  of  sin  a  motive  to  deter 
from  sin. 

And  the  fact  that  all  these  divine  means,  and 
motives,  and  influences  are  used  in  this  world  to 
turn  men  from  sin  to  holiness,  teaches  us  that  this 
world  is  a  place  of  probation — the  place  where 
God's  long-sufiering  spares  men  in  order  that  they 
may  repent  and  obey  the  gospel.  If  in  view  of 
forbearance  and  infinite  mercy  and  motives  on  the 
part  of  God,  they  will  not  be  saved,  the  only  alter- 


PEOBATION    AND    RETRIBUTION.      151 

native  is  thsd  thej  be  permitted  to  sin  and  suffer  the 
consequence.  In  the  intermediate  state  they  will 
suffer  in  proportion  to  the  sinfuloess  of  their  charac- 
ter, and  when  "  death  and  hell  deliver  up  their 
dead  every  one  not  found  written  in  the  Lamb's 
Book  of  Life  will  be  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire,  which 
is  the  second  death." 

The  existence  of  hell  may  even  be,  in  one  sense, 
an  evidence  of  God's  mercy  as  well  as  his  justice. 
It  may  be  the  best  thing  that  can  be  done  for  na- 
tures which  have  confirmed  themselves  in  sin. 
Suppose  it  had  been  proposed  to  Benedict  Arnold, 
after  his  apostasy,  to  return  to  the  colonies — ask  the 
pardon  of  Washington — confess  his  wicked  duplicity 
and  treachery,  and  on  these  conditions  be  restored 
to  citizenship.  He  would  have  known  that  such  a 
course  would  promote  his  happiness,  yet  without  a 
change  of  principle,  he  would  have  rejected  it  with 
contempt.  Suppose  further,  that  when  the  war 
was  finished,  and  Washington  had  put  down  all 
power  adverse  to  the  happiness  of  the  colonies, 
Arnold  was  found  among  the  prisoners,  having 
contended  as  long  as  he  could  against  the  govern- 
ment. His  situation  was  now  such,  that  any  con- 
fession that  he  might  make,  or  any  pardon  for 
which  he  might  ask,  could  proceed  from  no  other 


152      PROBATION    AND    KETRIBUTION. 

than  selfish  motives.  When  men  fall  into  the  hands 
of  the  living  God,  or  into  the  hands  of  the  executor 
of  the  law,  repentance  and  love  to  the  lawgiv-er  is 
then  impossible,,  because  the  motive  determines  the 
character  of  the  act,  and  right  motives  in  acting 
would  then  be  impossible,  because  thej  would  be 
necessarily  selfish. 

Now,  then,  seeing  repentance  and  love  for  the 
governor  under  such  circumstances  would  be  im- 
possible, suppose  the  alternative  had  been  proposed 
to  Arnold  either  to  spend  his  life  in  the  presence 
of  Washington,  and  in  the  society  of  those  who 
knew  him  to  be  a  traitor  at  heart ;  or  to  be  banished 
to  an  island  which  contained  only  rebels  and  crim- 
inals like  himself,  he  would  undoubtedly  have 
chosen  the  latter  immediately.  Because,  although 
the  island  would  be  a  hell  on  account  of  the  remorse 
of  guilty  consciences  and  the  rage  of  evil  passions 
that  would  exist  and  increase  there,  yet  his  nature 
had  become  so  corrupted,  that  to  live  under  the 
eye  of  the  magnanimous  Washington,  and  amid 
those  who  abhorred  bad  principles,  would  have  been 
to  his  soul  severer  punishment  than  to  live  among 
tlie  guilty  and  condemned  in  the  island. 

Now,  suppose  Washington  (knowing  that  his 
apostasy  had  so  corrupted  his  nature  that  he  would 


PROBATION    AND    RETRIBUTION.      153 

be  less  miserable  to  be  banisbed  from  bis  presence 
tban  to  continue  in  tbe  society  tbat  made  patriots 
bappy),  in  view  of  bis  past  life,  and  in  view  of  tbe 
cbaracter  be  tben  possessed,  bad  banisbed  bim  for- 
ever from  bis  presence,  sucb  banisbment  would 
bave  been  not  only  an  exbibition  of  justice  but  of 
mercy,  and  it  would  bave  been  tbe  best  tbing  tbat 
could  bave  been  done  for  tbe  man  in  view  of  bis 
cbaracter  and  circumstances.  So  witb  God,  Ban- 
isbment to  bell  is  tbe  best  tbing  tbat  can  be  done 
for  tbose  wbo  die  in  rebellion ;  tberefore  God  bas, 
in  justice  and  mercy,  provided  a  bell  for  fallen 
angels  and  impenitent  sinners,  wbo  die  unpardoned 
and  unreconciled  to  God,  as  revealed  in  Cbrist  Je- 
sus. 

Tbese  views,  tben,  present  tbe  love  of  God  in 
tbe  only  rational  ligbt — consistent  witb  justice  and 
witb  tbe  principles  of  rigbteous  moral  government 
— witb  tbe  nature  of  man,  and  especially  witb  tbe 
revelation  of  God.  In  tbe  ligbt  of  tbe  subject  as 
tbus  exbibited,  tbe  revelation  of  trutb,  tbe  existence 
of  conscience;  tbe  influence  of  tbe  cburcb  of  Cbrist, 
tbe  motives  of  tbe  gospel,  tbe  power  of  the  atone- 
ment, and  tbe  influence  of  tbe  Holy  Gbost,  are  all 
direct  evidences  of  tbe  love  of  God.  And  tbe 
wickedness   of  individuals,  notwithstanding   tbese 


154      PROBATION    AND    RETEIBUTION. 

manifestations  of  mercy,  in  refusing  to  repent  and 
put  their  confidence  in  Christ,  renders  it  necessary 
that  they  should  be  damned,  because  they  will  not 
be  saved  in  consistency  with  their  own  nature,  nor 
■with  justice,  nor  with  the  moral  government  of 
God. 

Another  form  of  argument,  constantly  reiterated, 
is  stated  as  follows  : 

God  is  the  Father  of  all  men.  A  good  father,  if 
he  had  the  power,  would  not  permit  his  children  to 
suffer  except  for  their  own  good.  God  has  the 
power,  and  therefore  will  permit  no  suffering  ex- 
cept for  the  good  or  the  reformation  of  his  off- 
spring. 

In  the  assemblies  of  Universalists  and  Rational- 
ists this  appeal  is  constantly  made  to  the  partialities, 
prejudices,  and  sympathies  of  parents  ;  and  by  this 
method  as  much  as  any  other,  they  pervert  the 
truth  and  beguile  unstable  minds  into  error. 

This  position  is  untrue  in  botb  its  parts.  God 
does  not  act  toward  the  family  of  man  as  a  good 
earthly  parent  would  act  toward  bis  children  if  he 
had  the  power ;  nor  can  he  do  so,  as  we  shall  see, 
without  a  direct  violation  of  the  principles  of  truth 
and  righteousness.  A  good  earthly  parent,  if  he 
had  the  power,  would  not  allow  bis  child  to  become 


PROBATION    AND    RETRIBUTION.       155 

a  tliief,  or  a  debaucLee,  or  a  blasphemer,  or  a  mur- 
derer; yet  God,  having  the  power  to  prevent  it, 
does  permit  men  to  commit  every  degree  of  crime. 
A  good  earthly  parent  would  not  permit  his  chil- 
dren to  suffer  excruciating  pain  by  fire,  accident, 
or  poison,  yet  God  permits  these.  A  good  earthly 
parent,  if  he  had  the  power  to  prevent  it,  would 
not  allow  one  child  to  oppress  another,  nor  would 
he  allow  his  children  to  become  insane,  or  to  blas- 
pheme the  name  of  their  father,  or  to  injure  his 
interests ;  yet  God  has  the  power,  and  allows  all 
these  things  among  the  human  family.  And  if  the 
condition  of  all  be  alike  hereafter,  God  is  unjust  to 
permit  one  child  to  make  another  miserable  during 
their  whole  life  in  this  world,  and  then  receive 
both  to  equal  blessedness  hereafter. 

But  further,  it  would  be  unjust  in  God  if  he  were 
to  treat  all  men  as  earthly  parents,  under  the  influ- 
ence of  their  parental  instincts,  treat  their  children. 

God  has  for  wise  purposes  implanted  in  the  hearts 
of  parents  peculiar  instincts.  These  instincts  are 
constitutional,  as  they  are  in  animals,  and  they  lead 
parents  to  feel  peculiar  attachments  and  partialities 
for  their  own  children,  which  they  do  not  feel  for 
the  children  of  others.  This  natural  instinct  has 
been  recognized  as  partial  in  all  ages.     It  is  recog- 


150      PROBATION    AND     II  E  T  R  I  B  U  T  I  0  N . 

nized  in  all  courts  of  justice  as  disqualifying  parents 
and  children  for  testifying  for  or  against  each  other. 
While  parents  would  insist  upon  the  execution  of 
the  law  upon  others,  their  parental  instincts  would 
lead  them  to  resist  its  execution  upon  their  own 
children.  Those  who  hear  the  appeal  of  false 
teachers  upon  this  subject  never  stop  to  reflect  that 
it  charges  God  with  injustice.  Earthly  jDarents  are 
partial — God  is  impartial.  Suppose,  for  instance, 
that  in  some  neighborhood  a  young  man  should 
rebel  against  the  laws,  and  commit  murder,  or  some 
crime  worthy  of  imprisonment  for  life.  His  own 
father  would  shelter  him  from  the  just  penalty  of 
the  law,  and  use  every  means  that  his  son  might 
go  "  unwhipped  of  justice."  But  what  would  the 
other  fathers  in  the  neighborhood  do  ?  These 
would  use  all  diligence  to  bring  the  guilty  individ- 
ual to  the  justice  which  his  crimes  merited.  They 
would  even  enter  his  father's  house  and  commit 
him  to  the  officers  of  the  law.  Now,  in  this  case, 
which  did  right?  Every  honest  man  says,  those 
who  brought  the  culprit  to  justice  ;  while  the  father 
who  concealed  his  son,  acting  as  a  parent,  was 
"  partial"  and  a  "  respecter  of  persons."  Now,  shall 
man  be  more  just  than  God  ?  And  yet  skeptics 
delude  their  bearers  by  comparing  the  justice  of  Je- 


PROBATION    AND    RETRIBUTION.      157 

hovah,  who  is  "no  respecter  of  persons,"  to  the 
natural  sympathies  of  this  earthly  parent.  Will  it 
not  be  great  mercy  in  God  to  forgive  such  outrages 
upon  his  character ;  especially  after  he  has  plainly 
said,  Rom.  ii.  6,  that  he  "  will  render  to  every  man 
according  to  his  deeds — to  them  who  by  iMtient  con- 
tinuance in  well  doing  seek  for  glory,  and  honor, 
and  immortality,  eternal  life;  but  unto  them  that 
are  contentious,  and  obey  not  the  truth,  but  obey 
unrighteousness,  indignation  and  wrath,  tribulation 
and  anguish,  upon  every  soul  of  man  that  doeth 
evil ;  of  the  Jews  first,  and  also  of  the  Gentiles." 

Nor  are  men  the  children  of  God  in  the  sense 
that  Adam  was  the  son  of  God.  God  was  the  im- 
mediate creator  both  of  the  soul  and  body  of  Adam. 
The  first  man  was  created  holy,  possessing  the  moral 
image  of  his  Maker,  and  was  the  son  of  God  in  a 
sense  in  which  Adam's  posterity  are  not. 

Nor  is  it  true  that  all  men  are  the  children  of 
God  in  the  same  sense  that  Christians  who  are  born 
of  the  Spirit  are  the  sons  of  God.  Like  many  of 
our  day,  the  Jews,  who  denied  the  divinity  of 
Christ,  and  expected  salvation  without  repentance 
and  faith,  claimed  that  they  were  the  children  of 
God,  and  that  God  was  their  father.  They  said  to 
Jesus  (John,  viii.  41-47),    "  We  be  not  born  of 


158      PEOBATION    AND    RETEIBUTION. 

fornication,  we  have  one  father,  even  God^  Tho 
reply  of  Christ  to  this  assumption^  of  wicked  men 
ought  to  put  to  shame  Universalists,  Eationalists, 
and  all  others,  who,  without  faith  and  the  love  of 
God,  which  produce  obedience,  yet  claim  to  be 
God's  children.  Said  Jesus  to  such  individuals, 
"  Ye  are  of  your  father  the  devil,  and  the  lusts  of 
your  father  ye  will  do,"  etc. 

THE   TRUE   VIEWS. 

God  is  the  Universal  Creator.  "  All  things  were 
made  by  Christ,  and  without  him  was  not  any  thing 
made  that  was  made."  Man  was  distinguished  from 
the  creatures  by  being  created  in  the  moral  image 
of  God,  "  in  righteousness  and  true  holiness."  After 
God  had  created  the  original  parents  of  the  races, 
he  instituted  those  laws,  in  accordance  with  which 
they  perpetuated  their  earthly  existence.  By  his 
sin  man  lost  his  holiness  and  his  birthright^  and  the 
moral  image  of  God,  in  which  he  was  created,  was 
effaced  from  his  soul.  The  steps  by  which  he  fell 
(mark  them)  were — First.  Under  evil  influence  he 
was  led  to  doubt  the  truth  of  God's  word.  Second. 
Under  the  influence  of  this  doubt  he  turned  from 
holiness  to  disobedience.  Now,  in  order  to  his 
restoration,  he  must  return  by  precisely  the  same 


PROBATION    AND    RETRIBUTION.      159 

steps  bj  whicli  lie  departed  ;  only  the  agency  under 
•which  he  acts  is  the  opposite  one,  and  the  steps  the 
opposite  way.  First.  Under  the  influence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  he  must  place  his  confidence  again  in 
God's  Word,  i,  e,,  have  faith  in  Christ ;  and,  second^ 
under  the  influence  of  this  faith,  he  must  return  to 
obedience,  i.  e.,  must  repent.  Man  must  be  born 
again  of  the  Spirit,  and  then  he  will  have  Christ, 
the  image  of  God,  again  "  formed  in  his  soul,  the 
hope  of  glory."  (John,  i.  12,  13.)  "  As  many  as 
received  him,  to  them  gave  he  power  to  become 
the  sons  of  God,  even  to  them  that  believe  on  his 
name ;  which  were  born,  not  of  blood,"  i.  e.,  not 
by  natural  generation ;  "  nor  of  the  will  of  the 
flesh,"  i.  e.,  not  by  the  power  or  self-determination 
of  the  fleshly  or  carnal  will ;  "  nor  of  the  will  of 
man,"  i.  e.,  not  by  the  power  of  moral  suasion,  nor 
by  the  efforts  of  the  will  of  men  over  each  other ; 
"  but  of  God,"  i.  e.,  renewed  by  the  Holy  Ghost. 
The  sons  of  God  are  those  who  are  born  again  of 
the  Spirit  through  the  truth.  None  are  the  chil- 
dren of  God,  and  God  is  a  Father  to  none  in  the 
spiritual  sense,  except  those  who  are  willing  to 
separate  themselves  from  the  unbelieving  and  dis- 
obedient, and  by  faith  and  repentance  become  as 
little  children.     (See  2  Cor.  vi.  14,  18.) 


160      PROBATION    AND    RETRIBUTION. 

When  individuals  are  thus  restored  to  the  favor 
of  God,  and  the  image  of  God  is  restored  to  their 
souls,  then  tbej  become  "  heirs  of  God,  and  joint- 
heirs  with  Jesus  Christ."  They  have  the  privileges, 
the  blessings,  and  the  inheritance  of  children,  and 
God  covenants  as  their  father  to  overrule  all  things 
for  the  good  of  his  obedient  children  (Rom.  viii. 
28),  and  when  it  is  necessary,  in  order  to  their 
spiritual  good,  he  chastens  them  as  a  good  father 
does  his  children,  and  in  a  manner  in  which  those 
are  not  disciplined  who  are  called  in  the  Scriptures 
the  "  children  of  this  world — the  children  of  dis- 
obedience— the  children  of  the  devil."  (See  1  Cor. 
xi.  32  ;  Heb.  xii.  6-8.) 


LETTER    X. 

refutation  op  common  fallacies  on"  the  subject 
op  future  retributiok 

My  Dear  Sir  : — 

We  are  told,  as  noticed  in  a  preceding  letter, 
tliat  "  the  woes  of  sin  are  but  its  antidote.  Suffer- 
ing comes  from  wrong-doing,  as  well-being  from 
virtue.  If  there  be  suffering  in  the  next  world,  it 
is,  as  in  this,  but  the  medicine  for  the  sickly  soul," 
p.  438. 

In  the  above  sentence  the  usual  method  of  the 
author  is  adopted.  Truth  is  adroitly  mingled  with 
error.  The  fallacy  of  disciplinary  punishment,  as  a 
cure  for  sin,  and  the  hope  of  universal  salvation,  is 
propagated  in  a  form  of  words  which,  in  proper  con- 
nections, would  teach  a  general  truth.  All  good 
men  believe  that  "suffering  comes  from  Avrong- 
doing,  as  well-being  from  virtue ;"  but  it  does  not 
therefore  follow  that  the  woes  of  sin  are  its  antidote, 
either  in  this  world  or  the  next. 

It  is  true,  no  doubt,  that  good  men  are  punished 


162  ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION. 

for  their  sins  in  this  world;  their  discipline  produces 
reform,  and  fits  them  for  heaven.  But  it  does  not 
follow  that  the  woes  of  sin  produce  the  same  effect 
upon  the  impenitent  mind.  Such  a  result  in  the 
case  of  those  who  are  not  converted  is  impossible, 
because  it  is  by  faith  that  discij)line  from  the  divine 
Father  becomes  a  good  in  the  said.  In  the  case  of 
those  who  have  faith,  a  Father's  hand  and  a 
Father's  love  are  seen  in  adverse  providences. 
Thej  receive  them  as  discipline,  and  are  brought 
by  them  into  a  penitent  and  filial  temper ;  and  thus 
temporal  afflictions  are,  as  a  matter  of  experience, 
a  means  of  separating  a  believing  mind  from  evil. 
But  in  the  case  of  those  who  are  "  without  faith 
and.  without  God  in  the  world,"  temporal  afilictions 
do  not  produce  piety.  God  does  not  design  to  reform 
sinners  by  the  woes  of  sin.  Ifhedoes^  he  fails  in  his 
object ;  because  some  men  sin,  and  suffer  the  woes  of  sin 
all  their  lives,  and  groiu  worse  and  worse  till  they  die. 
If,  therefore,  God  disciplined  them  in  order  to  re- 
form them,  the  effort  was  worse  than  a  failure,  be- 
cause instead  of  making  them  better,  it  made  them 
worse. 

It  is  not  only  a  fact  which  all  but  the  morally 
blind  can  see,  that  the  discipline  which  is  a  "  savor 
of  life  unto  life"  with  some,  is  a  "  savor  of  death . 


ON    FUTURE    RETEIBUTION.  163 

unto  death"  with  others ;  but  it  is  likewise  a  dis- 
tinctly revealed  doctrine  of  the  New  Testament. 
"  God  knows  how  to  deliver  the  godly  out  of 
temptation,  and  to  reserve  the  unjust  unto  the  day 
of  judgment  to  be  punished."  The  inspired  writer 
says  to  his  fellow-Christians,  "  When  «^e  are  afflicted 
we  are  chastened  of  the  Lord,  that  we  may  not  be 
condemned  with  the  worlds  So  far,  then,  as  this 
world  is  concerned,  it  is  matter  of  experience  and 
of  revelation  that  while  the  woes  of  sin  are  a  moral 
discipline  and  a  moral  benefit  to  one  class,  they  do 
not  benefit  the  other. 

That  wicked  and  worldly  men  often  repent  when 
they  feel  the  consequences  of  their  wrong-doing, 
there  is  no  doubt.  But  selfish  repentance  "  work- 
eth  death."  Instead  of  making  men  better,  it 
makes  them  worse.  They  sorrow  because  they 
have  injured  themselves.  Such  repentance  is  selfish, 
and  fits  men  for  hell.  "  The  sorrow  of  the  world 
worketh  death."  The  effects  of  sinning  upon  self- 
ish minds  make  them  worse  instead  of  better  ;  and 
so  far  as  Mr.  Parker  leads  unregenerated  men  to 
believe  that  the  woes  they  experience  in  conse- 
quence of  their  sins  will  be  a  cure  of  sin,  he  aids  to 
fit  them  for  the  "  second  death."  These  are  solemn 
words,  but  they  are  true. 


164  ON    FUTUEE    KETRIBUTION, 

ISTow,  without  dwelling  further  on  the  philosoph- 
ical blunder,  which  any  thoughtful  mind  should 
be  ashamed  to  commit,  i.  e.,  that  an  effect  will 
change  or  cure  its  cause,  let  me  invite  your  attention 
to  another  aspect  in  which  this  doctrine  of  Mr. 
Parker  (a  doctrine  held  likewise  by  Emerson, 
Chapin,  and  all  the  Transcendentalists  and  Univer- 
salists  in  general)  is  opposed  both  to  experience  and 
revelation. 

It  may  be  said — (because  in  view  of  preceding 
facts  it  must  be  admitted  that  temporal  jDrovidences 
do  not  reform  sinners) — it  may  be  said  that  the 
Tnoral  relations  of  things,  or  the  "  operations  of  marHs 
moral  nature^''''  will  cure  sin  in  his  soul.  Now,  we 
shall  show  that  this  fallacy  is  as  absurd  as  the  pre- 
ceding. 

Instead  of  sin  being  a  self-destructive,  it  is  a  self- 
strengthening  and  self-perpetuating  principle.  In- 
stead of  the  consequences  of  a  sinful  act  tending 
to  cure  the  sinful  propension,  it  actually  strengthens 
it.  After  one  sin,  another  is  more  easily  and  more 
readily  committed ;  because  the  sinfid  act  weakens 
the  conscience,  confirms  a  sinful  habit,  and  strength- 
ens the  propension  to  sin  in  the  soul.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  sin  blinds  the  moral  vision,  and  kills  the 
moral  sense.     The  more  sinful  any  individual  be- 


ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION.  165 

comes,  the  less  he  sees  and  the  less  he  feels  of  the 
evil  of  sin.  This  momentous  moral  fact  can  not  be 
denied.  It  is  a  natural  law — the  law  of  divine 
judgment — and  so  long  as  it  is  true,  the  statement 
that  the  effect  of  sinning  cures  sin  is  a  falsehood 
uttered  in  the  face  of  law,  experience,  and  the 
Scriptures. 

The  doctrine  that  conscience  punishes  men  for  sin 
is  an  impeachment  of  the  justice  of  God.  If  this 
were  true,  in  order  that  God  might  be  just,  the 
greatest  sinner  should  be  the  greatest  sufferer.  But 
the  opposite  of  this  is  true.  A  good  man  will  suffer 
more  for  neglecting  his  prayers,  than  a  bad  one  will 
feel  for  the  crime  of  profaneness.  K  conscience  is 
the  measure  of  God's  justice,  then  the  divine  being 
loves  the  wicked  more  than  he  loves  the  good  ;  be- 
cause the  more  holy  the  mind,  the  more  potent  is 
conscience — the  less  holy,  the  less  the  infliction. 
If  "  men  are  punished  as  they  go  along,"  and  suffer 
in  this  world  in  proportion  to  their  sin,  then,  as  we 
have  said  before,  Jesus  Christ  was  the  greatest  of 
sinners,  because  he  was  the  greatest  of  sufferers. 

The  fact  that  conscience  dies  as  sin  increases,  but 
grows  strong  in  proportion  to  holiness,  shows,  by 
human  experience,  what  is  afl&rmed  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, that  the  good  are  punished  in  this  world,  while 


166  ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION. 

the  evil  are  reserved  unto  the  day  of  judgment  to 
be  punished. 

"  But,"  says  our  philosopher,  "  suffering  comes 
from  wrong-doing,  as  well-being  from  virtue." 
Now,  if  this  fact  renders  it  doubtful  whether  there 
be  any  future  punishment,  it  renders  it  doubtful,  in 
the  same  measure,  whether  there  be  any  future  hap- 
piness. If  sin  punishes  itself,  virtue  rewards  itself. 
And  if  sin  ceases  to  punish  itself  at  death,  then 
virtue  ceases  to  reward  itself  at  death ;  so  that  there 
is  neither  rewards  nor  punishments — neither  a  hell 
nor  a  heaven,  in  the  life  to  come. 

If  the  woes  of  sin  will  make  men  good,  then  the 
joys  of  goodness  will  make  them  bad.  So  in  the 
next  world.  We  are  told  that  if  there  be  any  suf- 
fering, it  is  but  the  medicine  of  the  sick  soul,  i.  e., 
it  cures  sin ;  then  the  same  reasoning  is  valid  in 
regard  to  heaven.  If  there  be  any  enjoyment  there, 
it  makes  the  soul  sick  by  sin :  thus  hell  fits  the 
soul  for  heaven,  and  heaven  fits  the  soul  for  hell, 
one  as  much  as  the  other.  And  we  defy  any  man 
to  show  that  the  foundation  for  the  argument  is 
not  as  good  on  one  side  as  it  is  on  the  other.  If 
the  soul,  by  the  practice  of  sin  will  make  itself  holy, 
then  certainly  the  soul,  by  the  practice  of  virtue, 
will  make  itself  sinful. 


ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION.  167 

Let  us  look,  in  conclusion,  at  the  facts  wliicli  arc 
connected  with  the  subject  of  sin  and  retribution. 
What  are  the  effects  of  sin  in  this  life  ?  and — Do 
the  effects  of  sin  continue  in  the  future  world  ? 

The  answers  to  these  inquiries  are  plain  both  from 
reason  and  the  Scriptures.  Sin  produces  two  results 
in  the  soul.  It  produces  present  evil,  while  at  the 
same  time  it  fits  the  character  for  future  retribution. 
Just  as  benevolent  action  produces  peace  and  com- 
placency of  soul  in  the  present  life,  and  forms  the 
soul  into  a  benevolent  character,  which  fits  it  for 
heaven.  Every  one  knows — Mr.  Parker  knows — 
that  while  sin  produces  more  or  less  unrest  when 
the  act  is  done ;  it  likewise,  by  the  same  act,  fixes 
character.  Like  a  stream  which,  running  constantly 
over  a  rock,  wears  for  itself  a  channel  from  which 
in  the  end  it  can  not  escape,  so  the  soul,  by  con- 
tinued action  of  a  selfish  or  sensual  nature,  forms  a 
habit  which  fixes  its  mode  of  action  for  the  future. 
Now,  destiny  depends  ujDon  character.  A  benevo- 
lent heart  is  happy  in  its  own  exercises ;  a  selfish 
mind  is  confirming  a  character  which  destroys  hap- 
piness, or  rather  which  renders  happiness  impossi- 
ble. All  men  act  either  from  a  selfish  motive  or  a 
benevolent  one.  Every  selfish  act  confirms  a  selfish 
character,  and  the  man  who  dies  having  confirmed 


168  ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION. 

a  selfisli  character  bj  a  scliis'li  life,  is  fitted  for  hell ; 
and  as  death  is  not  a  change  of  the  soul  but  a 
change  of  the  bod}^,  he  will  experience  hell  forever, 
unless  God  annihilate  him  after  the  judgment. 

Is  it  said  now,  as  a  final  lie,  that  so  soon  as  the 
soul  is  separated  from  sense,  and  experiences  in  the 
next  world  the  evil  consequences  of  siu,  these  evil 
consequences  will  lead  to  repentance.  "We  answer 
that  repentance  in  view  of  the  experience  of  evil 
or  the  fear  of  evil,  is  repentance  toward  self,  not  to- 
ward God.  The  more  men  repent  from  an  expe- 
rience of  evil  consequences,  the  more  they  are 
damned.  The  thief  always  repents  when  the  sher- 
iff arrests  him.  Death  forces  many  men  to  submit, 
others  to  repent.  Such  repeatance  is  by  necessity, 
or  in  view  of  consequences,  not  in  view  of  God's 
goodness  and  of  the  evil  of  sin.  Some  weak  people 
talk  of  repentance  on  the  gallows.  Dying  sinners 
and  murderers  often  repent,  but  it  is  a  repentance 
forced  in  view  of  the  termination  of  their  moral 
agency.  In  this  world  "  repentance  toward  God" 
works  by  reformation  ;  and  faith  in  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  works  by  love.  In  the  world  of  doom,  when 
moral  probation  is  ended,  repentance,  by  the  neces- 
sity of  the  case,  works  by  remorse;  andfaith  by  tremb- 
ling.    "  The  devils  believe  in  one  God  and  tremble." 


ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION.  160 

Character  is  the  only  hope  of  heaven.  Character 
that  begins  with  "  repentance  unto  life,"  and  is 
formed  bj  benevolent  aspiration  and  action — char- 
acter which  is  conformed  to  the  divine  law,  and 
governed  by  benevolent  motive — which  motive  is 
begotten  only  by  faith  in  God,  as  manifested  in 
Christ  Jesus. 

The  last  thought  in  the  foregoing  paragraph 
brings  us  to  a  vital  point  in  the  divine  process  of 
human  salvation.  It  introduces  Christ  as  the  mo- 
tive power,  without  which  the  soul  is  destitute  of 
divine  life.  It  will  admit  of  a  homily,  which  you 
will  suffer  me  to  give  in  conclusion. 

One  of  the  darkest  developments  of  Mr.  Parker's 
infidelity — a  development  which  indicates  cardinal 
alienation  from  Christian  character  in  all  those  who 
sympathize  with  it — is  the  contempt  and  hostility 
manifested  toward  the  self-sacrifice  of  Christ  as  the 
motive  and  the  merit  by  which  men  are  saved.  In 
words  which  caricature  the  Christian  creed,  while 
they  convey  the  hostility  of  the  author  to  the  Chris- 
tian faith,  it  is  written  in  the  introduction  of  "  Dis- 
courses of  Eeligion,"  p.  5  (speaking  of  the  evils  of 
the  prevailing  religious  ideas)  :  "  We  dare  not  ap- 
proach the  Infinite  one  face  to  face.  We  whine 
and  whimper  in  our  brother's  name,  as  though  we 


170  ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION. 

could  only  approacli  the  Infinite  One  by  attorney." 
And  again,  page  432,  "  Can  men  approach  the 
Everywhere-present  only  by  attorney,  as  a  beggar 
comes  to  a  Turkish  king  ?  Away  with  such  folly. 
Christ  bears  his  own  sins,  not  another's." 

Has  Mr.  Parker  forgotten  that  it  is  one  of  the 
most  explicit  commands  of  Christ,  that  after  his 
sacrifice  and  ascension,  his  disciples  should  always 
make  their  supplications  in  his  name.  John,  xvi. 
22-27 — "  And  in  that  day  ye  shall  ask  me  nothing. 
Yerily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  whatsoever  ye  shall 
ask  the  Father  in  my  name,  he  will  give  it  you 
[ch.  xiv.  13,  "I  will  do  it"].  Hitherto  ye  have 
asked  nothing  in  my  name.  Ask,  and  ye  shall  re- 
ceive, that  your  joy  may  be  full."  "  At  that  day 
ye  shall  ask  in  my  name,  and  I  say  not  unto  you 
that  I  will  pray  the  Father  for  you,  for  the  Father 
himself  loveth  you,  because  ye  have  loved  me,  and 
have  believed  that  I  came  out  from  God." 

In  accordance  with  this  command  is  the  practice 
of  the  apostles  and  of  the  church  of  Christ  in  all 
ages. 

The  scoffing  of  Thomas  Paine  was  more  fair  in 
language  and  less  repulsive  in  spirit  than  that  of 
Mr.  Parker.  Thomas  Paine  believed  in  future 
retribution,  and,  in  stating  the  views  of  Christians, 


ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION,  171 

he  did  not  usually  pervert  them.  We  should  be 
glad  if  as  much  could  be  said  of  Mr.  Parker  and 
other  Universalists  and  Transcendentalists.  It  is 
easy  to  caricature  the  most  sacred  doctrines.  The 
doctrine  that  Christ  is  Mediator  between  God  and 
men  is  philosophical,  experimental,  and  scriptural. 
Mr.  Parker  does  not  argue  in  opposition  to  this. 
The  logical  faculty  is  not  develojjed  in  the  Carlyle 
school  to  which  he  belongs.  He  "  utters"  his  "  in- 
tuitions" in  words  which  men  whose  feelings  are 
hostile  to  the  gospel  will  love,  because  they  travestie 
the  truth. 

We  say  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  mediation  -is  a 
truth  which  commends  itself  to  the  reason,  as  it 
does  to  the  moral  wants  of  men.  [See  Phil,  of  Plan 
of  Salvation,  and  Book  II.  of  "  God  in  Christ."] 
All  spirit,  so  far  as  we  know,  affects  other  spirits 
through  organization.  How  does  Mr.  Parker  know 
but  that  Christ  is  the  medium  (if  we  may  so  speak) 
by  which  God  comes  in  contact  with  matter  ?  We 
know  that  he  is  the  medium  by  which  God  unites 
himself  with  humanity.  "  There  is  one  God  and 
one  Mediator  between  God  and  men — the  man 
Christ  Jesus."  The  human  soul  operates  through 
corporeal  media  upon  other  minds  ;  and  upon  mat- 
ter it  operates  through  more  remote  instrumentali- 


172  ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION. 

ties*  Media  of  communication  between  the  inferior 
and  superior  is  the  order  of  nature.  Is  not  the  di- 
vine Mediator  in  tliis  order  ?  or  does  God  contra- 
vene the  order  lie  has  himself  established  ? 

It  is  a  law  of  creation  that  substances  as  well  as 
spirits  come  together  by  affinity.  If  matter  or 
spirit  of  different  affinities  ever  bo  united,  a  new 
medium,  or  solvent,  must  be  found  by  which  the 
diverse  qualities  may  be  reconciled  or  harmonized. 
But  Mr.  Parker  wants  no  mediator  between  him  and 
the  Most  Holy — no  reconciliation  of  the  earth-born 
to  the  Eternal — no  solvent  of  the  imperfect  earthly 
that  it  may  melt  into  the  bosom  of  Infinite  Love. 

Blessed  be  God,  there  is  a  more  rational  and  a 
holier  faith  than  this.  The  revealed  Christ  is  the 
Mediator  in  the  order  of  nature,  and  in  the  ordina- 
tion of  grace.  God,  by  the  mediation  of  Christ, 
unites  himself  with  our  earthly  and  imperfect  na- 
ture, and  by  faith  the  soul  is  transformed  from  a 
lower  to  a  celestial  species.  On  one  side — the  di- 
vinity— God  comes  in.  On  the  other,  the  humanity, 
man  comes  in  ;  so  that  God  and  man  are  reconciled 
in  Christ.  "  God  was  in  Christ  reconciliug  the 
world  unto  himself." 

Mr.  Parker  ridicules  the  idea  of  approaching  God 
in  the  name  of  Jesus,  and  tells  us  that  "  he  died 


ON    FUTURE    RETRIBUTION.  173 

for  his  own  sins  !"  (SucTi  pTiraseology  is  wicked, 
but  it  needs  a  reply  as  well  as  a  rebuke.)  "We  are 
so  constituted,  that  benevolent  action  is  impossible 
with  the  human  mind  unless  the  motive-power 
which  moves  the  will  be  drawn  from  another,  not 
from  ourselves.  The  man  who  lives  and  acts  in 
view  of  Christ  is  God-moved ;  that  is,  his  soul  is 
exercised  bj  the  character  of  God  manifested  in 
Christ  Jesus.  The  man  who  has  no  faith  is  self- 
moved.  His  own  will  is  supreme,  and  not  God's 
will.  Hence  he  is  a  rebel  in  the  moral  government 
of  God.  When  we  love  another,  we  are  willing  to 
deny  ourselves  in  order  to  conform  to  the  object  of 
our  regard.  This  takes  the  motive  out  of  ourselves. 
If  the  will  of  that  other  is  incarnate  love,  the  soul 
moved  by  it  becomes  benevolent,  and  the  soul  can 
become  benevolent  in  no  other  way.  Until  this  is  ac- 
complished, every  act  of  life  is  selfish  ;  and  thus 
life-action  is  death-action,  which  fits  the  soul  for  the 
second  death. 

For  Christ's  sake,  then,  is  only  another  expres* 
sion  for  the  great  truth,  that  all  our  holy  motions 
and  emotions  are  dependent  on  him.  "  In  Christ's 
name"  is  a  recognition  that  God  is  manifest  in  his 
sacrifice  for  sin,  and  that  it  is  in  his  mercy  alone 
that  we  have  hope.     In  all  systems  there  are  two 


174  ON    FUTURE    K  E  T  ]{  I  B  U  T  I  0  N. 

motions  of  subordinate  bodies,  one  on  tlieir  own 
axis,  the  other  around  the  central  orbit ;  so  in  the 
spiritual  world,  the  soul  is  self-moved,  and  the  re- 
generated soul  moves  likewise  in  its  orbit  of  depend- 
ence on  God.  To  feel  reliance  on  the  merit  of 
Christ — to  trust  in  his  name — is  the  expression  of  this 
actual  and  practical  relation.  The  man  who  does 
not  feel  it  is  dead. 

Thus  the  mind  that  draws  its  motive  from  Christ 
is  a  restored  spirit.  The  affinity  between  the  divine 
and  human  mind  is  re-united,  and  the  soul  takes  on 
its  eternal  movement  around  the  infinite  center  of 
life  and  love. 

O  holy  One,  who  hath  manifested  thy  mercy  to 
us  in  Christ  Jesus,  in  thy  name  and  in  thy  merit 
we  trust  for  motive  to  move  our  will,  mercy  to  af- 
fect our  heart,  and  for  grace  to  pardon  our  sin ;  and 
not  unto  us,  but  unto  thee,  be  the  glory. 

Yours  in  the  heart  of  the  gospel. 


LETTER   XL 

reformers  and  their  relation  to  christianity. 

My  Dear  Sir: — 

In  the  first  letter  of  this  correspondence  I 
had  occasion  to  advert  to  Mr.  Parker  as  a  reformer, 
and  in  that  connection  to  speak  with  proper  respect 
of  his  principles  and  the  value  of  his  labors.  I 
mentioned  that  in  the  introduction  of  his  name  in 
many  cases,  I  used  it  as  the  representative  of  a  class. 
I  wish  you  so  to  understand  it  still.  While  it  is 
true  that  his  published  opinions  represent,  to  some 
extent,  all  the  heresies  and  moral  vagaries  of  the 
times,  yet  as  he  is  not  "  alone  in  his  glory"  in  rela- 
tion to  many  things  of  which  we  have  spoken,  and 
are  now  about  to  speak,  we  design  that  you  should 
apply  our  remarks  to  others,  and  to  yourself,  so  far 
as  you  "  muster  in  the  same  company." 

I  wish  in  this  letter  to  present  in  a  connected 
and  more  extended  form  what  I  believe  to  be  the 
true  value  of  reform  efibrt,  and  the  relation  of  be- 
nevolent reforms  to  the  gospel  of  Christ.      I  am 


176         REFOrvMERS    AND    CHRISTIANITY. 

sorry  to  kno"w  that  jonr  present  alienation  from 
many  with  whom  you  once  labored  is  occasioned, 
in  part  at  least,  hy  what  you  believe  to  be  "  a  defec- 
tion from  the  principles  of  justice  and  mercy  on  the 
part  of  those  who  claim  to  be,  par  excellence,  the 
disciples  of  Christ."  Now,  I  admit  your  charge, 
and  approve  the  sentiment,  if  not  the  spirit,  of  your 
censure  in  some  cases ;  but  the  facts  that  seem  to 
have  alienated  you  from  gospel  fellowship,  bind  me 
more  devoutly  to  gospel  truth  and  influence  as  our 
only  hope. 

While  I  indorse,  to  some  extent,  the  denounce- 
ments which  you  and  Mr.  Parker  utter  against  those 
who,  professing  to  be  Christians,  yet  by  their  silence, 
or  in  other  ways,  "  give  aid  and  comfort  to  evil- 
doers ;"  still,  there  is  often  a  spirit  of  indiscriminate 
denouncement  and  of  uncharitableness  of  speech 
which  indicates  something  else  than  the  "  mind  of 
Christ"  in  the  reprover. 

Let  the  defection  of  professing  Christians  on  the 
subject  of  reforms  be  distinctly  condemned.  Tliere 
are  cases  which  can  not  be  contemplated  by  right- 
minded  men  without  pity  and  abhorrence.  The 
studied  silence  of  ministers  and  whole  denomina- 
tions in  regard  to  one  of  the  most  demoralizing  and 
anti  republican  institutions  under  the  sun — the  gross 


REFORMERS    AND    CHRISTIANITY.         177 

inconsistencies  of  great  cTinrch  courts  whicli  con- 
demn and  disfellowsliip  dancers  and  sucla  like  of- 
fenders while  tliey  fellowship  actual  sinners — the 
defection  of  some  who  were  true  to  humanity  in  the 
beginning,  but  have  been  perverted  by  public  sen- 
timent, or  awed  into  silence  by  worldly  influences — 
the  purchase  of  others  by  great  boards  or  church 
powers,  by  offering  them  secretaryships,  editorships, 
and  such  like  bribes — such  cases  are  repulsive  not 
only  to  Christians  but  to  all  upright  minds.  I  do 
not  believe  as  you  do,  that  "  Jesus  would  class  such 
men  with  Judas,  as  '  a  devil'  whom  the  popular 
church  power  bought  to  betray  his  master ;"  yet 
that  Jesus  would  look  with  disapprobation,  if  not 
with  anger,  on  such  men,  I  can  not  doubt. 

How  far  there  may  be  palliation  or  apology  for 
such  cases  of  defection,  it  is  difficult  to  see.  To 
apologize  for  wrong-doing  weakens  the  moral  senti- 
ment against  wrong.  The  wisest  way  for  individual 
Christians  and  churches  to  do,  would  be  to  follow 
the  advice  of  Albert  Barnes  (which  he  has  not  fol- 
lowed himself),  and  separate  themselves  from  all 
church  bodies  and  boards  which  tolerate  and  sanc- 
tify sin  by  giving  it  the  communion. 

Great  church  organizations  are  thought  to  be  ex- 
pedient, but  they  must,  from  the  nature  of  the  case, 


178        REFORMERS    AND    CHRISTIANITY. 

embody  in  their  extended  limits  mucli  of  worldly 
influence  and  of  sin.  Many  of  them  have  power 
to  give  men  place  and  position.  Hence  they  become 
the  objects  of  idolatrous  regard  with  some,  and 
their  sentiment  and  power  control  many  others.  It 
is  not  strange,  therefore,  that  men  of  aspiring  minds, 
who  are  dependent  on  them  in  a  measure  for  posi- 
tion or  reputation,  should  endeavor  to  propitiate 
their  power,  even  so  far  as  to  tolerate  and  apologize 
for  the  sins  which  great  bodies  include  in  their 
bosom.  "  They  sacrifice  to  their  net,  and  burn 
incense  unto  their  drag,  because  by  them  their  por- 
tion is  fat,  and  their  meat  plenteous."  Hab.  i.  16. 

But  the  true  Christian,  while  he  sees  the  cause 
and  deplores  the  consequence  in  such  individual 
cases,  does  not,  therefore,  denounce  all  church  or- 
ganization and  all  evangelical  Christianity.  Many 
who  followed  Christ  when  he  announced  to  them 
popular  truth,  went  back  and  walked  no  more  with 
bim  when  he  announced  unpopular  truth.  And 
one  of  the  most  enlightened  of  his  professed  friends 
betrayed  him  on  the  charge  of  being  the  enemy  of 
the  government.  But  would  it  have  been  wise  in 
the  men  of  that  age,  while  they  condemned  this  de- 
fection and  wickedness,  to  have  refused  allegiance 
to  Jesus  as  "  the  only  name  given  under  heaven 


REFORMERS    AND    CHRISTIANITY.         179 

among  men,  by  wMcli  they  must  be  saved  ?"  On 
one  sucb  occasion  Jesus  said  to  tlie  few  faithful  ones, 
"■  Will  ye  also  go  away  ?"  One  answered,  "  Lord, 
to  whom  shall  we  go  ?  thou  hast  the  words  of  eter- 
nal life  ?"  The  apostacy  of  those  men,  whose  mo- 
tive is  corrupted  by  worldly  sentiment,  or  church 
power,  will  only  lead  the  true  heart  to  cling  more 
closely  to  its  master. 

Let  us,  therefore,  endeavor  to  discriminate  in  in- 
dividual cases,  between  what  is  good  and  evil  in 
this  matter.  I  shall  follow  your  objections  and 
allegations  for  the  most  part,  but  shall  not  deem  it 
necessary  to  quote,  in  an  extended  form,  your  words. 
I  wish  to  give  your  allegations  all  the  force  they 
deserve,  while  I  show  at  the  same  time  that  in  the 
evangelical  doctrine  and  power  of  our  holy  religion 
is  the  only  hope  of  good  to  men.  ■  * 

You  speak  of  Christian  ministers  as  "  more  Ju- 
daic than  Christian,  more  orthodox  than  evangeli- 
cal in  their  sentiments."  This  I  have  no  doubt  is 
true  of  some  of  the  prominent  theologians  of  this 
and  other  countries.  By  a  strange  hallucination, 
the  introductory  and  imperfect  system  of  Moses  is 
made,  in  many  instances,  the  higher  law  in  seeking 
an  exposition  of  the  teachings  of  Jesus.  The  spirit 
of  both  the  Old  and  the  New  Testaments  condemns 


180         REFORMERS    AND    CHRISTIANITY. 

such  a  method  of  exposition.  The  Old  Testament, 
in  its  later  periods  especiall}^,  looked  joyfully  to 
clearer  lio-ht  in  the  future.     The  New  declared  that 

O 

"-the  law  made  nothing  perfect,"  else  it  would  not 
have  been  superseded.  Grace  and  truth  are  hy  Jesus 
Christ.  The  error  of  interpreting  the  divine  teach- 
ings of  Jesus  in  accordance  with  a  darker  dispensa- 
tion, and  especially  in  accordance  with  the  deterio- 
rated principles  and  life  of  the  church  in  this  age.  is  one 
of  the  evils  of  our  times.  It  is  an  error  that  has 
prevailed  in  all  ages,  just  in  proportion  as  the 
church  has  become  worldly  and  wicked.  The  most 
hopeful  aspect  of  the  age  is,  that  a  protest  against 
this  and  kindred  abuses  of  the  gospel  is  rising  to 
heaven,  while  it  is  stirring  the  hearts  of  thousands 
upon  earth.  It  gathers  strength  and  volume,  and 
betokens  a  period  of  coming  renovation. 

But  it  is  likewise  said  that  we  are  more  orthodox 
than  evangelical.  The  charge  is  true  only  in  some 
cases.  Orthodoxy  without  evangelism  has  been  the 
bane  of  the  church  in  all  ages.  The  Scribes  and 
Pharisees  sat  in  Moses'  scat,  and  in  forms  of  faith 
and  non-essentials,  their  teaching  was  correct ;  and 
yet  Jesus  denounced  them  as  the  enemies  of  love 
and  righlc(;usness.  The  orthodox  wnevaugelical 
divines  are  the  most  subtle  anddifiQ.cult  enemies  that 


REFORMEES    AND    CHRISTIANITY.         181 

the  true  cliurcli  of  Christ  lias  to  deal  with.  In  the 
dsLjs  of  Edwards  they  resisted  and  persecuted  him. 
So  they  did  Wesley  ;  so  they  did  Whitefield.  Now 
they  build  their  tombs  and  laud  their  piety,  and  at 
the  same  time  persecute  and  denounce  other  men  of 
like  spirit.  In  the  next  age  the  orthodox  but  un- 
evangelical  theologians  will  build  the  tomb  of  Ed- 
wards and  Finney,  and  persecute  some  other  man 
of  God  that  denounces  the  sins  of  his  age,  whether 
in  the  church  or  out  of  it. 

What  we  want  is  not  less  orthodoxy,  but  more 
of  Christ's  spirit — more  love,  more  power  in  the 
hearts  of  the  ministry.  The  devil  may  be  orthodox, 
but  not  evangelical.  The  form  of  godliness  without 
its  power,  is  the  curse  of  the  church  and  the  world. 
There  are  many  church^,  especially  in  our  cities,  ■ 
from  which  the  poor  are  excluded  as  really  as 
though  one  of  the  elders  stood  at  the  door  with  a 
club,  to  strike  every  man  who  did  not  have  the 
mark  of  the  world  on  his  forehead.  Such  arrange- 
ments are  from  beneath,  not  from  above  ;  and  many 
of  those  who  worship  there,  if  they  have  any  ob- 
ject, have  only  a  selfish  one — to  add  heaven  to 
their  other  possessions,  just  as  they  would  add  an- 
other farm  to  their  domain.  If  Christ's  gospel  is 
true,  self-seeking,  lower  law,  orthodox,  wnevangeli- 


182        REFORMERS    AND    CHRISTIANITY. 

cal  teacTiers,  and  sucli  selfish  worsliipers,  are  not 
ministers,  or  members,  sucli  as  are  required  in  the 
New  Testament  church.  Do  not  understand  me  as 
denouncing  the  ministry  and  the  churches.  God 
forbid  !  Jesus  did  not  mean  to  denounce  the  true 
church  when  he  reprobated  the  formal,  selfish, 
hypocritical  majoritj'-  of  the  Jewish  teachers  and 
worshipers.  There  are  hundreds  of  true  ministers 
and  thousands  of  true  Christians  in  the  churches  ; 
and  true  Christians  are  nowhere  else;  but  now,  as 
in  Christ's  time,  they  have  to  fight  with  powers  and 
principalities, — with  "  spiritual  wickedness"  in  the 
church  ;  as  well  as  "  the  world,  the  flesh,  and  the 
devil"  out  of  the  church. 

In  my  opinion,  a  reformer  who  is  endeavoring  to 
promote  liberty  and  love  in  the  world,  is  much  bet- 
ter than  a  professor  who  turns  a  cold  shoulder  to 
benevolent  reforms.  The  one,  without  a  profession 
of  the  gospel,  does  by  nature  some  things  written  in 
the  gospel.  The  other  professing  the  gospel,  denies 
its  spirit. 

It  may  be  asked,  then,  "  What  advantage  hath 
the  Christian  ?"  "  Much,  every  way."  His  advan- 
tages are  eminent  and  vital.     Let  us  see. 

Society  can  receive  its  final  moral  renovation  onhj 
hy  Christianity,  and  reforms  can  triumph  in  the  end 


REFORMERS    AND    CHRISTIANITY.        183 

only  through  Christian  faith,  Seneca  and  Plato, 
who  represent  the  highest  moral  attainment  without 
Christianity,  say  nothing  about  the  wickedness  of 
slaveholding,  and  nothing  about  the  intrinsic  self- 
ishness of  living  for  the  good  of  the  individual  or 
class,  and  not  for  the  good  of  the  family  of  man. 
They  do  not  announce  the  principles  of  fraternity 
and  equality,  nor  do  they  reveal  a  faith  ichich  works 
hy  love  to  God  and  men.  They  do  not  require  those 
who  have  means,  light,  liberty,  to  make  self-denials 
to  confer  the  advantages  they  possess  on  those  de- 
prived of  them.  They  did  not  send  forth  epistles 
to  urge  the  world  to  worship  a  common  Father,  and 
to  require  men  to  labor  for  each  other,  as  a  common 
brotherhood.  They  did  not  say,  "  Love  your  ene- 
mies," "  Kesist  not  evil,"  "  God  is  love,  and  he  that 
loveth  is  born  of  God."  Yet  these  are  the  vital  ele- 
ments of  all  true  reform^  and  without  them  reformation 
from  social^  civil,  and  moral  evil  is  impossible.  With- 
out the  principles  of  Christianity,  there  is  neither 
the  element  nor  the  power  necessary  to  reform  the 
world. 

Further.  Although  reform  principles  may  pro- 
duce social  progress,  where  they  are  urged  and  ad- 
vocated without  faith  in  Christ  as  a  model  or  a 
motive,  yet  the  result  is  only  a  temporary  and  a 


184       REFORMERS      AXD    CHRISTIANITY. 

temporal  good.  What  the  world  needs  most  is  an 
increase  of  henevolence,  sometliing  that  tends  to  destroy 
selfishness^  and  j^roduce  love  to  God  and  man.  Now, 
philosophy  and  religion  say  that  love  only  can  beget 
love.  Every  thing  begets  its  kind.  A  selfish  mind, 
by  faith  in  Christ,  becomes  benevolent.  Hence 
faith  in  Christ,  as  a  manifestation  of  the  love  of  God, 
is  essential  in  order  to  motive  power  in  the  heart. 
Knowledge  of  truth  is  needful,  but  it  is  not  the  o??e 
thing  needful  in  true  reform.  Those  who  have 
most  knowledge  are  sometimes  the  worst  men  in 
the  land.  The  thing  wanted  is  love  for  men  as  a 
motive  in  the  heart.  We  may  know  to  do  good, 
and  have  no  disposition  to  do  it.  We  want  some- 
thing within  that  empowers  conscience,  and  actuates 
the  will  in  accordance  with  the  conviction  of  right. 
This  power  must  likewise  be  a  love-power — a  power 
moving  the  affections.  It  must  be  a  spiritual 
power,  so  that  we  shall  seek  the  spiritual  good 
as  well  as  the  temporal  good  of  others.  It  must 
likewise  be  a  God-begotten  power  in  the  soul,  or 
our  effort  for  men  will  not  be  to  make  them  like 
God,  by  leading  them  to  love  and  obey  him.  Mere 
conviction  of  right,  without  love  for  man,  can  be 
bribed ;  and  there  is  a  natural  love  of  man  that  is 
mere  instinct,  more  fully  developed  in  some  natures 


REFORMERS    AND    CHRISTIANITY.        185 

fhan  in  others.  This  lias  nature,  not  njoral  motive, 
for  its  basis,  and  is  easily  overcome  bj  interest,  and 
perverted  by  selfishness  and  passion.  Hence  what 
the  soul  wants  most  after  a  knowledge  of  duty,  is  a 
faith  that  works  by  love — a  faith  that  causes  the 
man  to  act  out  his  convictions  under  the  influence 
of  the  love-motive.  Now  we  aflS.rm  that  faith  in 
Christ  as  the  model  and  the  motive,  gives  the  soul 
this  guide  and  this  power.  Eeform  without  gospel 
faith  may  accomplish  good,  but  it  will  be  a  good 
that  is  earthly  and  local  in  its  nature,  and  that  does 
not  rise  to  the  unselfish,  the  immortal,  and  the  spir- 
itual. God's  love  for  man  was  revealed  in  Christ, 
and  man's  love  for  man  is  begotten  by  faith  in 
Christ.  "Without  this  vitalizing  faith,  reform  will 
be  a  mere  struggle  of  natural  benevolence  against 
the  predominating  selfishness  of  the  church  and  the 
world.  The  struggle  will  promote  self-righteousness  on 
the  one  hand,  and  increase  malignity  on  the  other. 

But,  more  than  all,  the  true  Christian  aims  to 
bless  all  the  interests  of  man.  He  looks  upon  man 
as  an  immortal  being — as  having  a  soul  as  well  as 
a  body.  To  emancipate  a  slave  does  not  change  his 
character  nor  reform  his  morals.  To  do  good  to 
men  temporally  is  good — to  do  good  to  them  tem- 
porally and   spiritually   is  both    better  and  best. 


186         REFORMERS    AND    CHRISTIANITY. 

Freedom  from  sin  is  a  greater  blessing  than  free- 
dom from  slavery.  The  gospel  aims  to  accomplish 
both.  Eeform,  then,  without  Christianitj,  is  but  a 
partial,  a  temporal,  and  an  imperfect  good.  The 
principle,  the  spirit,  and  the  power  of  reform  are 
combined  in  the  gospel. 

There  may  be  activity  in  reform  which  is  accom- 
panied with  a  wrong  spirit.  The  denunciatory  re- 
former would  engage  himself  in  the  evil  he  denounces 
if  his  locality  or  circumstances  were  altered.  Some  of 
the  most  self-elated,  self-suf&cient,  and  self  seeking 
men  that  I  have  known,  have  belonged  to  this  class 
of  reformers.  They  labor  for  the  right  with  a  self- 
ish and  wrong  spirit.  They  speak  the  truth  in 
bitterness,  and  hence  their  truth  becomes  an  occa- 
sion of  hardening  evil-doers,  almost  as  much  as  the 
withholding  or  perverting  of  truth  by  the  self-seek- 
ing and  the  unsanctified  in  the  churches.  The  dif- 
ference is,  that  truth,  even  though  it  be  uttered  in 
a  bad  spirit,  will  enlighten  and  awaken  conscience 
in  men — it  will  produce  agitation,  and  hence  ulti- 
mate benefit ;  while  to  pervert  or  withhold  truth,  is 
to  refuse  the  only  remedy  which  the  Almighty 
prescribes  for  the  evil  of  sin. 

Let  us  have  reform  then — reform  both  in  Church 
and  State.     Progress  is  the  order  both  of  the  phys- 


EEFORMERS    AND    CHRISTIANITY.        187 

ical  and  the  moral  world.  But  we  can  have  no  per- 
manent reform  without  the  impulse  and  guidance 
of  faith  in  Christ.  The  stability  of  reform  must  be 
conscience,  and  the  impulse  in  reform  must  be  love. 
But  conscience  and  love  are  generated  alone  bj 
faith  in  Christ.  When  the  reformer  moves  in  the 
sublimity  of  power,  the  momentum  is  generated  in 
the  heart. 

Yours  for  the  rights  the  true,  and  the  good. 


LETTER    XII. 

reforms  and  reformers. 

My  Dear  Sir  : — 

Permit  me  now,  in  conclusion,  to  notice  wBat 
I  believe  to  be  mistakes  and  mischiefs  in  tlie  meth- 
ods and  opinions  of  Mr.  Parker  and  his  class  of 
reformers. 

No  one  doubts  but  that  a  great  advance  will  yet 
be  made  in  promoting  equality  and  fraternity  among 
men.  There  are  abuses  in  the  social  usages  of  the 
world  that  need  to  be  reformed  ;  and  the  inquiry 
with  the  philanthropist  and  the  Christian  is,  by 
what  means  can  we  best  remove  evil  and  promote 
good  ?  Now,  I  for  one,  as  you  know,  believe  that 
but  little  good  can  be  achieved  by  any  one,  no  mat- 
ter how  good  the  intention  may  be,  unless  Chris- 
tianity, according  to  the  orOiodox  interpretation,  be 
made  the  central  and  vital  element  in  the  effort. 

Some  years  ago  there  was  a  mania  abroad  in  the 
land  in  regard  to  associated  labor ;  and  many  men 
of  good  intentions — men  who  really  supposed  that 


REFORMS    AND    REFORMERS.  189 

the  highest  good  of  themselves  and  others  could 
be  promoted  by  common-stock  and  common-labor 
communities  —  united  themselves  in  associations 
formed  more  or  less  on  the  Fourier  plan.  Wise 
Christian  men  knew  the  experiments  would  fail ; 
but  it  required  a  large  number  of  experiments,  and 
immense  losses  of  property,  and  the  wrecking  of 
many  families,  to  convince  the  friends  of  the  scheme 
that  it  was  impracticable  for  the  ends  they  proposed 
to  gain.  Associations  which  receive  the  Christian 
faith  as  a  bond  of  union  have  generally  succeeded. 
Such  were  the  common-stock  associations  of  the 
early  church  of  Christ ;  such  are  the  Moravian  as- 
sociations, and  others  that  might  be  named.  But 
associations  founded  on  selfish  principles  can  not 
succeed.  The  motive  inducing  the  effort  is  a  self- 
destructive  one.  The  members  of  such  associations 
are  drawn  together,  each  one,  by  the  motive  to  pro- 
mote his  own  happiness  and  ease.  Each  individual 
seeks  his  own  good  as  the  supreme  end,  and  uses 
the  association  as  a  means.  Thus  it  is  an  aggregate 
of  self-seeking  minds.  Every  selfish  effort  strength- 
ens the  selfish  principle  in  them,  and  an  explosion 
in  the  end  follows  as  a  natural  consequence.  The 
Christian  association  seeks  the  good  of  the  world  by 
means  of  association.     In  their  motive  and  labor 


190     REFORMS  AND  REFORMERS. 

the  members  seek  to  please  Christ,  not  themselves. 
For  this  end  they  make  self-denials,  because  they 
have  a  higher  aim  than  self.  They  can  find  happi- 
ness in  any  labor  which  will  j^romote  the  common 
object.  Self  is  not  supreme,  but  subordinate.  With 
such  motives  association  is  possible,  and  generally 
profitable  to  the  members,  conducive  to  individual 
happiness,  and  to  the  glory  of  God. 

All  efforts  of  a  philanthropic  character  should  be 
encouraged  up  to  the  line  of  practicability  and 
utihty,  hut  ultra  action  produces  re-action  ;  and  there 
are  many  men  of  good  intentions  and  enthusiastic 
minds  who  have  little  wisdom  to  judge  either  of 
human  character  or  the  feasibility  of  schemes  to 
promote  human  good,  who  engage  in  popular  re- 
forms. The  scheme  of  Christ  includes  the  whole 
family  of  man.  Its  means  are  available  and  benef- 
icent, and  adapted  to  its  end.  It  seeks  to  engage 
every  individual  both  as  a  recipient  and  a  dissemi- 
nator of  its  blessings.  It  is  pitiful  to  see  those  who 
evidently  are  not  so  wise  as  Christ,  rejecting  the 
divine  scheme  for  a  chimera  of  their  own  weak  or 
wicked  minds. 

Christianity  favors  efforts  that  will  benefit  men 
temporally  as  well  as  spiritually.  The  Christian 
can  labor  with  those  who  reject  Christ,  in  schemes 


REFORMS  AND  REFORMERS.     191 

to  promote  the  mere  temporal  good  of  men,  pro- 
vided there  be  nothing  to  hinder  him  from  seeking 
in  addition  to  this  their  highest  good,  by  promoting 
that  faith  which  alone  gives  peace  and  right  motive 
in^lie  soul.  Most  or  all  reforms  that  aim,  in  the 
estimation  of  worldly  men,  merely  at  the  temporal 
good  of  men,  are  auxiliary  to  Christianity,  and 
hence  Christians  should  aid  in  promoting  them,  not 
only  for  temporal  but  ultimate  good. 

The  land  reform  has  beneficent  phases.  Monop- 
oly of  land  is  an  injury  and  an  evil.  The  system 
of  Moses  gave  each  family  of  each  generation  the 
privilege  of  accumulating,  while  yet  it  caused  the 
fee  of  the  soil  to  revert  once  in  fifty  years,  thus  pre- 
venting monopoly  of  soil  by  industrious  parents  for 
indolent  children.  This  was  the  wisest  and  most 
comprehensive  scheme  possible.  In  our  own  coun- 
try, at  the  beginning,  something  like  this  reversion 
law  might  have  been  adopted.  And  even  now, 
while  the  rewards  of  industry  should  be  sacredly 
protected,  a  policy  should  be  adopted  to  prevent  a 
monopoly  of  the  untilled  soil  by  men  of  capital. 
Let  capital  have  its  reward  in  other  directions,  but 
not  by  excluding  actual  cultivators  of  the  land,  nor 
by  raising  the  prices  of  the  virgin  soil  against  those 
who  desire  to  cultivate. 


192     REFORMS  AND  REFORMERS. 

The  vagaries  of  reformers  wlio  make  no  allowance 
for  the  different  degrees  of  bodily  or  mental  strength 
in  individuals — who  would  give  indolence  the  same 
reward  as  industrj- — who  would  give  the  wicked  a 
bribe,  and  vice  the  means  of  indulgence,  are  con- 
trary to  nature,  and  inj  urious  to  good  morals.  Such 
vagaries  are  worse  than  weakness.  Every  plan  that 
does  not  reward  industry,  calculation,  and  enterprise, 
is  at  war  with  virtue,  and  in  league  with  vice.  In 
this  country,  where  all  have  equal  chances,  the 
prevention  of  monopolies  is  the  main  duty  of  those 
who  seek  to  promote  human  welfare. 

But  in  all  associations,  whether  for  reformation  or 
for  social  protection  and  benefit,  there  is  one  central 
and  universal  defect  which  can  be  remedied  only  by 
Christianity. 

The  masonic  institution,  and  other  secret  asso- 
ciations, may  seek  to  some  extent  the  moral  and 
temporal  good  of  their  members,  and  of  those  con- 
nected with  their  members ;  but  secret  association 
gives  men  an  advantage  of  their  neighbors,  if  they 
are  willing  to  take  it.  And  beside,  such  associa- 
tions are  good  or  bad  according  to  the  character  of 
their  individual  members.  Where  the  general 
prevalence  of  Christianity  has  made  the  members 
better,  lodges  are  better.     Where  the  temperance 


EEFOKMS  AND  REFORMERS.     193 

reform  banishes  intoxicating  drinks,  lodges'  are 
sober.  They  are  in  themselves  good  or  evil  as 
Christian  agencies  from  without  the  lodge  have 
affected  them. 

Then  there  is  still  the  central  defect,  a  selfish  mo- 
tive. Providence  has  made  a  difference  in  the  con- 
dition of  men.  Some  are  defective  in  body,  in 
miud,  in  health.  Some  are  laboring  under  evils  by 
circumstances  which  society  has  induced.  For 
these  no  selfish  association  can  make  provision. 
Christianity  brings  the  influence  of  love,  fraternity, 
and  the  authority  of  Christ  to  bear  on  its  disciples, 
as  motives  to  induce  them  to  relieve  those  who,  by 
providential  arrangements,  need  relief,  without  re- 
spect of  persons,  of  birth,  or  of  sex.  The  most  de- 
crepid  and  needy  are  to  be  aided  first,  whether  they 
be  in  one  set  of  circumstances  or  another.  Chris- 
tianity is  the  complement  of  Providence.  It  is  the  sys- 
tem God  has  ordained  to  work  into  the  inequalities 
of  natural  providence,  and  thus  to  balance  natural 
evil  by  moral  good.  Provident  associations  of  me- 
chanics, or  moral  associations  for  the  promotion  of 
temperance  and  virtue,  may  be  auxiliary  to  this 
great  end  ;  but  Christianity  alone,  by  church  organ- 
ization and  by  individual  effort  and  beneficence, 
meets  the  imperfections  of  natural  providences  and 


194     REFOKMS  AND  REFORMERS. 

balances  tliem.  Hence  Christianity  is  a  part  of  the 
divine  economy  of  tbe  world  ;  and  if  its  require- 
ments were  fully  carried  out,  in  act  and  spirit,  there 
would  be  no  evils  to  reform  which  would  not  be 
reached  by  human  agency. 

It  is  evident,  then,  that  reformers,  even  if  en- 
gaged in  a  good  cause,  are  fools  and  blind  in  all 
cases,  just  so  far  as  they  reject  the  plan  and  the 
power  offered  by  evangelical  Christianity. 

Those  who  seek  to  promote  what  are  called 
"  woman's  rights,"  have  a  good  object  in  view  so  far 
as  they  aim  to  promote  equal  legislation  in  relation 
to  marital  rights  and  parental  duties.  They  pursue 
laudable  objects  when  they  seek  to  ameliorate  the 
condition  of  female  workers,  and  to  advance  wages 
in  all  cases  in  proportion  to  the  value  of  the  service. 
But  when  they  labor  to  make  women  public  speak- 
ers, or  public  actors  in  politics,  or  in  any  masculine 
emlcavor,  they  are  doing  injury  to  society  by  acting 
against  the  constitution  of  nature  and  the  revealed 
will  of  God. 

The  male  is  armed  by  nature  for  defense.  He  is 
strong  to  provide.  He  is  voiced  for  public  speech. 
The  female  is  unarmed,  and  voiced  only  for  social 
speech.  A  hen  can  crow,  but  it  is  ridiculous,  and 
indicative  of  unmaternal  qualities,  when  she  does. 


REFORMS  AND  REFORMERS.     195 

A  woman,  by  an  effort  against  nature,  can  give  a 
public  harangue,  and  can  say  things  often  more 
witty  and  beautiful  than  most  men  would  say  on 
the  same  subject.  So  some  men  could  do  certain 
domestic  duties  better  than  some  women ;  but  the 
change  to  accommodate  the  exceptions  would  be 
unnatural  and  unwise.  There  is  no  public  speak- 
ing to  be  done  that  can  not  find  advocates  of  the 
best  talent  among  men ;  and  the  influence  which 
social  effort  will  produce  for  any  cause  in  which  a 
woman  ought  to  be  interested,  will  always  be 
greater  and  better  than  any  she  could  exercise  by  a 
public  exhibition  of  herself.  "VYe  say  public  ex- 
hibition of  herself,  because  there  are  many  persons 
who  will  go  to  see  a  woman  sj3eak  in  public,  that 
attend  to  look  at  her  person  and  gestures,  and  the 
flush  of  her  excitement ;  and  for  no  better  purpose. 
Public  places  and  speeches  attract  all  sorts  of  char- 
acters. A  woman  may  excite  certain  characters  to 
applause  which  arises  from  a  source  that  a  chaste 
mind  would  abhor.  Continued  attention  to  work 
or  office,  every  week  for  years,  is  of  most  value  in 
all  responsible  labors.  This  married  women  could 
not  give.  Hence,  male  duties  and  wages,  in  such 
cases,  is  impossible. 

The  contention  for  the  ballot  is  an  indication  of 


196    EEFORMS  AND  REFORMERS. 

like  folly.  The  ballot  is  not  given,  as  tlie  common 
plea  supposes,  to  represent  property.  If  that  were 
so,  the  rich  would  vote,  as  the  slaveholders  do,  for 
their  chattels.  Every  man  who  is  a  citizen  has  a 
ballot,  whether  he  own  property  or  not.  Where 
the  property  of  the  country  is  represented  in  legis- 
lative bodies  by  those  who  have  an  equal  interest 
with  others,  then  every  property -holder  is  repre- 
sented whether  they  cast  their  ballot  or  not. 

The  incongruity  to  nature  and  circumstances  of  a 
woman's  making  speeches  and  voting  is  so  palpa- 
ble, that  the  evil  can  never  gain  much  favor  with 
the  public.  If  all  women  were  to  vote,  it  would 
only  double  the  number  of  votes,  without  increas- 
ing the  strength  of  either  side  in  civil  questions^ 
and  if  they  had  a  ballot-box  of  iheir  own,  the  Irish 
Catholic  women  would  kill  off  our  wives.  In  moral 
questions,  the  social  influence  of  women  to  lead 
men  to  vote  right  is  greater  in  the  result  than  any 
thing  that  could  be  gained  by  antagonistic  public 
action.  Nature  has  made  men  the  providers  and 
the  protectors,  and  has  devolved  duties  upon  a  mar- 
ried woman  that  incapacitates  her  from  providing, 
while  it  renders  her  necessarily  the  inmate  of  the 
home.  The  duties  of  most  men  require  all  days  of 
the  year  in  a  steady  employment.     Nature  forbids 


REFORMS  AND  REFORMERS,     197 

this  ability  to  woman.  A  "woman's  rights"  lady 
might  say  to  her  like-minded  sister,  "  Send  your 
son  John  down  this  evening,  and  I  will  let  my 
daughter  Lucy  go  home  with  him  after  dark,  to 
protect  him  from  night  rowdies;"  but  such  a  speech 
would  be  supremely  ridiculous  ; — not  more  so,  how- 
ever, than  the  aims  of  Mr.  Parker  and  others,  who 
adopt  the  vagaries  of  foolish  men  and  women  in 
regard  to  what  they  call  "  woman's  rights." 

Let  the  women  rule  where  only  true  happiness  is 
found — in  the  home  and  social  circle.  Let  the  men, 
as  nature  requires,  rule  in  public  works,  public  as- 
semblies, and  out-door  life.  In  families,  as  there 
can  be  only  one  will  in  relation  to  removals,  ex- 
penditures, and  many  joint  interests,  if  there  be  two 
opinions,  after  kind  examination,  which  is  seldom 
the  case,  then,  as  one  will  must  govern  in  the  case, 
the  nature  of  things,  in  all  ordinary  instances,  makes 
the  husband's  will  supreme.  If  one  or  the  other 
must  yield,  the  husband  is  by  the  law  of  nature  and 
revelation,  the  head  of  the  family. 

As  we  have  stated,  there  is  provision  made  against 
the  possibility  of  much  evil  from  the  hallucinations 
of  ultra  reformers  in  this  direction  ;  but  their  effort 
repels  many  who  desire  to  promote  real  reform. 
There  are  employments  which  women  might  fill — 


198     REFORMS  AND  REFORMERS, 

there  are  trades  wliicli  tliej  might  learn.  In  the 
practice  of  some  branches  of  the  medical  profession 
women  might  do  much  good,  and  in  some  cases  do 
it  more  appropriately  than  men.  Let  us  not  cease 
then  to  seek  the  good  in  this  matter  because  of  the 
vagaries  of  fools. 

There  is  a  class  of  reformers  who  are  moved  by 
their  sympathies  rather  than  by  the  reason  and  just- 
ice of  the  case.  This  class  of  men  sometimes  be- 
come dangerous  to  the  well-being  of  society.  They 
sympathize  with  scoundrels,  and  seek  to  save  them 
from  just  penalties.  They  would  make  the  peni- 
tentiary a  place  of  comfortable  retirement  for  vil- 
lains ;  and  thus  induce  such  a  state  of  things,  that 
those  who  had  never  been  there,  would  have  no 
dread  of  the  crime  that  would  send  them  there  ;  and 
those  who  had  been  there  would  be  prepared  for 
any  villainy,  if  going  back  to  light  labor  and  com- 
fortable quarters  was  the  only  consequence.  To 
provide  for  the  health  and  moral  reform  of  criminals 
is  proper,  but  to  make  their  penalty  a  punishment 
is  a  duty,  which  it  is  crime  against  society  to  neglect. 

The  persons  alluded  to  may  be  called  instinctive 
reformers,  becauses  their  impulses  are  organic,  not 
moral.  They  frequently  misdirect  their  compassion, 
because  the  impulse,  in  their  case,  is  the  highest 


REFORMS  AND  REFORMERS.     199 

law.  But  as  subjection  of  tlie  will  to  instinctive 
compassion  is  mucli  better  than  subjection  of  tbe 
will  to  a  corrupt  public  sentiment,  bence  tbe  natural 
reformer  may  be  a  better  man  tban  a  corrupt  Chris- 
tian teacher.  But  both  are  wrong  in  the  main 
matter.  There  is  the  susceptibility  of  sympathy 
even  in  the  lower  animals.  "When  one  suffers,  its 
cry  will  rally  others  of  its  class  to  the  rescue. 
"When  the  cry  of  distress  is  heard  among  animals, 
if  one  should  take  sides  with  the  enemy  that  was 
crushing  its  suffering  fellow,  instead  of  rallying  to 
the  relief,  it  would  be  an  apostate  even  from  the 
best  principles  of  brute  nature.  The  "  natural  re- 
former" obeys  the  highest  impulses  of  his  nature — 
the  professed  Christian,  who  is  not  a  reformer,  has 
apostatized  both  from  the  higher  impulses  of  hu- 
manity and  from  Christ.  But  the  true  Christian 
obeys  Christ,  and  hy  faith  the  higher  instincts  of  hu- 
Tnanity  become  rational  and  moral  in  their  exercise. 

Let  us  apply  these  principles  to  some  of  the  ultra 
notions  of  Mr.  Parker  and  others.  They  speak  of 
capital  punishment,  and  denounce  those  who  main- 
tain the  justice  of  the  death  penalty.  They  do  this 
in  common  ad  captandum  phrase  Now,  while  it  is 
admitted  that  none  but  the  willful  and  deliberate 
murderer  should  die,  it  can  not  be  shown  that  the 


200     REFORMS  AND  REFORMERS. 

Scriptures,  or  the  principles  of  mercy  guided  by 
justice  and  reason,  would  j^ermit  the  deliberate  mur- 
derer to  live.  Sympathy  ivith  the  mere  suffering  of 
criminals  is  suspicious. 

Suppose  I  witness  a  pirate-ship  attack  a  packet, 
and  murder  in  cold  blood  the  crew  and  passengers. 
I  witness  immediately  after  a  revenue-cutter  attack 
the  pirate,  and  destroy  the  murderers  of  the  inno- 
cent. There  vs^as  as  much  of  animal  suffering  in 
the  one  case  as  the  other.  But  if  I  feel  for  the  suf- 
ferings of  the  pirates  as  I  do  for  the  murdered  pas- 
sengers, I  am  a  brute,  possessing  blind  compassion 
without  a  sense  of  justice  ;  or  else  I  am  a  pirate  at 
heart,  sympathizing  with  like  character. 

It  is  painful  to  read  the  remarks  of  such  reform- 
ers when  they  talk  mawkishly  about  the  momentary 
suffering  of  the  murderer,  while  not  a  word  is  said, 
and  apparently  not  an  emotion  felt,  in  view  of  the 
various,  protracted,  and  excruciating  sufferings 
which  the  villain  may  have  inflicted  upon  his  in- 
nocent victim. 

It  is  an  error  to  place  the  mercy  of  the  New  Test- 
ament in  antagonism  to  capital  punishment.  The 
cardinal  principles  of  the  Christian  Scriptures  recog- 
nize the  rectitude  of  the  voluntary  suffering  of  in- 
dividuals, when  it  is  necessary  for  the  good  of  the 


REFORMS  AND  REFORMERS.     201 

wliole,  and  of  penal  infliction  when  necessary  as 
penalty  for  violated  law.  Even  the  death-penalty 
is  recognized  as  proper  when  executed  as  a  pen- 
alty. Paul  says,  "  If  I  have  done  any  thing  worthy 
of  death,  I  refuse  not  to  die."  Thus  implying  that 
such  crimes  were  possible,  and  such  penalty  proper. 
The  Mosaic  institutions  were  for  a  peculiar  people, 
in  the  initiatory  stages  of  civilization  and  piety ; 
but  the  Great  Teacher  sanctioned  the  death-penalty 
under  the  law  of  Moses,  and  thereby  taught  that 
taking  life  as  a  penalty  is  not  wrong  in  itself. 
Hence  the  true  inference  is,  that  while  it  may  be 
proper  under  the  gospel  to  abate  the  death-penalty 
in  all  minor  cases  of  crime,  yet  the  infliction  of  the 
penalty  on  the  part  of  society  can  never  be  shown 
to  be  wrong  in  itself.  Jesus  said  to  the  Scribes 
and  Pharisees  who  had  abrogated  the  death-penalty 
in  the  case  of  the  drunken,  stubborn,  and  rebellious 
son  that  cursed  his  parents,  and  could  not  be  re- 
formed (Matt.  XV.),  "  God  commanded,  saying,  Honor 
thy  father  and  thy  mother,  and  he  that  curseth  father  or 
mother  let  him  die  the  death ;  but  ye  say  otherwise, 
and  thus  '  make  the  commandment  of  God  of  none 
effect:  " 

The  ultimate  principle,  admitted  by  all,  is,  that  as 
life  is  the  highest  individual  good,  it  should  be  pro- 


202  REFORMS    AND    REFORMERS. 

tected  by  the  highest  penalty.  If  no  other  than  the 
death-penalty  will  so  certainly  j^'^'otect  the  life  of  the 
innocent^  then  those  who  would  spare  the  life  of  ike  mur~ 
derer,  do  it  at  the  expense  of  the  life  of  the  innocent. 
Now  it  has  never  been  proved,  and  can  not  be,  that 
imprisonment  for  life  is  a  security  against  future 
murder  by  the  condemned.  A  criminal  was  con- 
demned by  a  jury  to  be  hung  for  deliberate  mur- 
der, in  a  neighboring  State,  a  few  years  since. 
This  penalty  was  commuted  to  imprisonment  for 
life.  In  less  than  three  years,  he  was  pardoned ; 
and  for  the  crimes  he  has  since  since  committed  in 
Texas,  the  sympathizers  with  this  murderer  are 
guilty. 

Commutation,  or  sentence  to  life  imprisonment, 
endangers  witnesses  both  before  and  after  trial.  A 
man  of  fifty  commits  a  theft.  He  knows  an  impris- 
onment of  ten  years  will  follow  the  proof.  "Will  he 
not  thus  be  bribed  to  murder  the  witness?  His 
penalty  for  both  crimes  can  be  no  greater  than  that 
for  the  least ;  and  if  he  murders  the  witness  he 
hopes  to  escape.  Will  not  the  discontinuance  of 
the  deatli  penalty  transform  most  thieves  into  mur- 
derers ?  It  has  done  so  in  many  cases.  If  they 
commit  the  murder  it  is  only  imprisonment  for  a 
longer  term,  and  that  penalty  doubtful ;  if  they  kill 


EE  FORMS    AND    REFORMEES.  203 

tlieir  victim,  his  testimony  is  impossible,  and  chances 
of  escape  are  greater,  while  the  penalty  is  in  many 
cases  no  greater.  Will  it  not  take  away  from  the 
public  mind  an  impression  of  the  sanctif-y  of  life,  and 
thus  in  the  estimation  of  villains  decrease  their  sense 
of  the  guilt  of  murder  ?  Michigan  has  been  for 
some  years  the  paradise  of  villains,  owing,  as  all 
reason  teaches,  to  the  low  estimate  of  guilt,  and  the 
light  penalty  of  crime  prevailing  in  that  State.  A 
virtuous  community  will  punish  the  guilty.  An 
immoral  community  will  punish  them  by  impulse, 
or  not  at  all.  The  remission  of  the  death-penalty 
has  produced  in  Wisconsin,  and  is  now  producing 
in  some  other  States,  the  most  dreadful  outrages. 
The  conscience  which  God  has  given  men  says  the 
murderer  should  die.  This  has  been  its  testimony 
in  all  ages  and  in  all  time.  When  an  immoral  phi- 
lanthropy remits  the  death-penalty,  natural  con- 
science is  outraged,  and  men  rise  in  mobs  to  inflict 
vengeance  upon  the  murderer. 

The  pleas  usually  urged  against  the  death-penalty 
have  no  real  foundation  either  in  morals  or  in  rea- 
son. It  is  said  that  in  some  cases  the  innocent 
suffer  death,  and  no  remuneration  can  be  made. 
So  they  may  suffer  imprisonment  for  life,  and  no 
remuneration  can  be  made.     Imperfection  may  at- 


204  REFORMS    AXD    REFORMERS. 

tach  to  all  law  and  penalty  that  is  based  upon  tes- 
timony ;  but  even  this  possible  evil  might  be 
guarded  agaiust  by  sentence  of  imprisonment,  with- 
out pardon,  when  doubt  of  the  fact  were  possible. 

It  is  said,  again,  that  society,  when  it  takes  life 
for  life,  commits  the  same  crime  with  the  malefactor. 
Shame  on  such  solecisms  ;  then  when  we  confine  a 
murderer  for  life,  we  commit  a  crime  equal  in  guilt 
to  that  of  the  criminal.  When  society  takes  a  cer- 
tain sum  as  penalty  from  a  man  who  damaged  his 
neighbor,  it  commits  the  same  offense  with  the 
criminal,  does  it  ?  If  there  were  a  society  of  devils 
for  the  promotion  of  crime,  such  arguments  would 
receive  a  premium. 

But  life  is  sacred.  It  ought  not  to  be  taken  in 
any  case.  It  can  be  forfeited  only  to  him  who  gave 
it.  The  statement  is  false  in  fact  and  in  theory. 
If  Mr.  Parker  were  attacked  by  an  assassin,  with 
deadly  weapons,  and  with  the  known  intent  to  kill, 
it  would  be  his  duty  to  save  his  own  life  by  taking 
the  life  of  the  murderer.  Now,  is  not  life  forfeited 
as  much  after  the  act  as  before  ?  It  is  certain  that 
the  guilt  is  as  great,  and  that  j  ustice  and  universal 
conscience  would  afiGirm  the  same  penalty  after  as 
before  the  fact. 

It  is  said  society  is  guilty  in  view  of  the  maperfect 


EEFOEMS  AND  REFOEMERS.     205 

provision  made  for  the  moral  and  intellectual  train- 
ing of  the  masses  of  the  people.  If  our  school  sys- 
tem be  inadequate  or  partial,  it  should  be  reformed 
and  strengthened  ;  but  this,  while  it  would  prevent 
the  development  of  evil,  in  many  cases  would  not 
prevent  crime.  It  is  a  fallacy  to  argue  that  the 
absence  of  remedies  used  to  prevent  an  evil  is  the 
cause  of  that  evil.  If  the  argument  were  true,  all 
who  have  inadequate  intellectual  and  moral  training 
would  be  alike  criminals;  which  statement  is  false 
and  slanderous. 

It  is  said,  again,  by  the  philosophers  of  the 
Fowler  school,  that  the  propensity  to  crime  is  or- 
ganic ;  that  criminal  acts  arise  from  the  unbalanced 
impulsion  of  certain  developments ;  and  that  there- 
fore the  criminal  should  be  an  object  of  pity  rather 
than  a  subject  for  penalty.  If  this  be  true,  then 
the  Calvinistic  system,  which  these  reformers  take 
pains  to  deride,  is  true  in  its  utmost  stringency.  K 
this  were  true,  then  murderers  should  be  extermi- 
nated for  the  same  reason  that  we  kill  a  viper  or  a 
tiger.  Both  are  the  natural  enemies  of  human  life ; 
and  reform  in  one  case  would  be  just  as  possible 
as  in  the  other.  The  Chinese,  who  kill  both  the 
criminal  and  his  children  to  prevent  the  propagation 
of  crime,  would  be  right.     Such  a  philosophy  ig- 


206     REFORMS  AND  REFORMERS. 

norcs  reform  efforts  of  all  kinds.  Reform  in  that 
case  would  be  possible  only  by  knocking  in  tbe  evil 
develoiDments  on  the  bead  with  a  hammer.  The 
Fowler  philosophy  perpetrates  the  error  of  all 
superficial  thinkers.  It  takes  facts,  true  only  as  a 
general  expression,  and  derives  particulars  from 
them.  It  likewise  applies  its  principles  wrong-end 
foremost.  It  makes  development  govern  mind  in- 
stead of  urging  the  true  aj^plication,  that  it  is  the 
character  of  the  mind  that  produces  the  peculiarities 
of  development  in  the  body.  The  seed  produces 
the  tree — not  the  tree  the  seed.  A  bad  spirit  pro- 
duces bad  development.  The  law  of  creation  and 
of  philosophy  agrees  with  the  Scri|)tures  tbat  "  every 
seed  produces  its  own  body,  and  '  so  it  will  be  in  the 
resurrection.^  " 

But  it  is  argued  that  murderers  dread  imprison- 
ment for  life  as  much  as  they  do  the  gallows.  All 
facts,  and  all  consciousness  in  all  men,  deny  this  as- 
sertion. If  this  be  true,  why  do  criminals  and  their 
friends  seek  a  commutation  of  penalty  ?  Why  do 
all  murderers  joyfully  accept  commutation?  Even 
the  devil  concedes  the  falsehood  of  this  statement 
when  he  said,  "  All  that  a  man  hath  will  he  give 
for  his  life." 

Penalty  is  designed  to  prevent  as  well  as  to  pun- 


REFORMS  AND  REFORMERS.     207 

isTi  crime.  The  death -penalty  is  the  highest  re- 
straint that  can  possibly  be  opposed  to  murder. 
Murder  is  unlike  all  other  crimes.  It  is  the  crime 
of  crimes :  but  it  can-never  be  distinguished  as  such 
without  inflicting  upon  the  murderer  the  highest 
penalty.  By  the  death-penalty  the  murderer  is 
taught  to  value  the  life  of  others  as  he  does  his 
own.  This  is  the  golden  rule.  And  unless  death  be 
the  penalty,  a  villain  meditating  crime  can  never 
value  the  life  of  another  as  he  does  his  own.  By 
the  imprisonment-penalty  he  is  taught  to  value  the 
life  of  his  neighbor  as  little  as  he  values  imprison- 
ment in  the  penitentiary.  Who  dares  to  teach 
murderers  this  low  estimate  of  life  ? 

It  is  said  that  facts  and  statistics  prove  that  im- 
prisonment is  a  remedy  as  effectual  in  preventing 
murder  as  the  death-penalty.  This  is  not  proved  ; 
and  I  believe  it  is  not  true.  Facts,  as  far  as  they 
go,  prove  the  contrary.  The  instances  alleged  in 
favor  of  abolishing  the  death-penalty,  those  of  Cath- 
arine of  Eussia  and  the  government  of  Tuscany, 
were  of  too  short  duration  to  prove  any  thing.  On 
the  other  side,  we  have  the  case  in  the  German 
States,  where  the  statistics  are  accurate,  and  suffi- 
cient time  for  a  fair  experiment  has  been  allowed. 
The  "  Conversation-Lexicon,"  a  work  of  the  highest 


208     REFORMS  AND  REFORMERS. 

authority  concerning  German  topics,  says,  "Those 
States  where,  from  a  one-sided  benevolence,  the 
government  wished  to  abolish  capital  punishment, 
were  compelled  again  to  avail  themselves  of  it,  and 
that  on  the  ground  that  in  the  opinion  of  men  death 
is  the  greatest  of  evils,  in  preference  to  which  they 
would  willingly  undergo  the  most  laborious  life, 
with  some  hopes,  of  escape  from  it,  because  the 
death-penalty  is  the  most  terrible  of  penalties," 

Wordsworth,  a  man  of  the  most  highly-endowed 
intellect,  the  purest  and  the  warmest  benevolence, 
in  the  London  Quarterly  Review,  No.  137,  says  : 
"  Whenever  it  appears  to  be  good  for  mankind,  ac- 
cording to  the  arrangements  of  Providence,  that 
death  should  be  inflicted  by  human  ministration,  it 
is  a.  false  humility,  di  false  humanity,  and  a  false  piety , 
for  a  man  to  refuse  to  be  the  instrument."* 

Eobespierre  resigned  his  office  in  early  life  rather 
than  sign  a  warrant  for  the  execution  of  a  criminal. 
His  future  life  showed  him  to  be  a  monster  destitute 
by  nature  of  the  sense  of  justice. 

The  following  passage  in  Blackstone  (Book  IV. 
chap,  i.)  should  not  be  forgotten :  "  In  France  the 
punishment  of  robbery,  either  with  or  without  mur- 
der, is  the  same ;  hence  it  is  that  though  perhaps 
*  See  Cheever  on  Capital  Punishment. 


REFORMS    AND    REFORMERS.  209 

they  are  subject  to  fewer  robberies,  yet  they  never  rob 
hut  they  also  murder.  In  China  murderers  are  cut 
to  pieces,  but  robbers  not ;  hence  in  that  country 
tiiey  never  murder  on  the  highway^  though  they  often 
rob."  Is  not  this  satisflictory  proof  that  the  man, 
or  the  legislature,  that,  through  sympathy  with 
criminals,  aids  to  abolish  the  death-penalty,  thereby 
stimulates  villains  to  murder  the  innocent. 

If  this  is  not  sufficient,  take  a  fact  nearer  home. 
Capital  punishment  was  abolished  several  years 
since  in  Michigan,  The  grand  jury  of  Wayne 
County  in  that  State  made  a  presentment  to  the 
legislature,  in  which  they  say  :  "  Facts,  we  are  in- 
formed, have  occurred  in  our  midst,  proving  that 
some  of  the  murderers  in  this  county  have  been 
influenced  and  urged  forward  to  their  deeds  of 
wickedness  through  the  consideration  that  the  death- 
penalty  has  been  abolished  from  our  penal  code." 

Much  might  be  added,  showing  that  in  some  cases 
imprisonment  for  life  is  a  bribe  to  commit  murder  ; 
in  other  cases  it  is  no  penalty,  and  in  all  cases  it 
places  the  murderer  where  no  further  penalty  for 
crime  is  possible.  He  may  murder  his  keeper  ;  he 
may  poison  the  prison  well,  and  thus  murder  all  the 
inmates ;  his  life  is  sacred,  and  he  is  above  law ; 
no  further  penalty  can  be  inflicted. 


210     REFOKMS  AND  REFORMERS. 

That  paragrapTi  of  your  letter  wliicli  is  designed 
to  have  a  point  touched  with  sarcasm,  which  alludes 
to  the  repentance  of  murderers  and  the  lianging  of 
Christians,  is  to  be  regretted.  The  Bible  nowhere 
teaches  that  willful  murderers  ever  exercise  repent- 
ance unto  life.  "  No  murderer  hatb  eternal  life 
abiding  in  him."  That  murderers  repent,  no  one 
doubts.  Judas  repented  and  went  to  "  his  own 
place."  Eepentance  is  either  selfish  or  holy.  If 
it  is  repentance  in  view  of  the  consequence  to  one's 
self,  it  jDroduces  remorse,  or  deceives  the  mind. 
Every  criminal  repents  when  the  hand  of  the  sheriff 
is  on  his  shoulder.  This  is  forced  repentance.  It 
is  the  murderer's  repentance.  It  is  honest  repent- 
ance. But  it  is  "  repentance  unto  death."  Not 
holy  repentance,  produced  by  faith  in  Christ. 

Some  I  know  believe  that  true  repentance  in  such 
cases  is  possible.  If  it  he  jiossible,  the  death-penalty  is 
much  more  likely  to  produce  repentance  than  the  pen- 
alty of  imprisonment.  Dr.  Webster,  while  there  was 
hope  of  escape  or  commutation,  maintained  the 
falsehood  that  he  was  innocent.  When  sentence 
was  passed,  and  pardon  or  commutation  denied,  he 
became  penitent  and  truthful.  In  "  Bemis'  Report," 
in  Webster's  last  conversation  with  the  sheriff  he 
says  :  "  All  the  proceedings  in  my  case  have  been 


REFOEMS  AND  REFORMEES.     211 

just.  The  court  have  discharged  their  duty.  The 
law  officers  of  the  commonwealth  did  their  duty, 
and  no  more.  The  verdict  of  the  jury  was  just. 
The  sentence  of  the  court  was  just ;  and  it  is  just 
that  I  should  die  on  the  scaffold^  in  accordance  with 
that  sentenced  Thus  does  the  sentence  of  death, 
when  there  is  no  hope  of  escape,  produce  in  some 
cases  honest  repentance.  In  Webster's  statement 
that  his  sentence  was  just,  and  that  he  deserved  to 
die,  we  have  the  same  evidence  given  in  many  other 
cases  when  the  crime  is  confessed.  It  is  the  deci- 
sion of  the  human  conscience,  one  which  ought  not 
to  be  violated,  that  the  man  who  deliberately  takes 
the  life  of  his  neighbor  forfeits  his  own.  The  man 
who  refuses  to  aw^rd  this  highest  penalty  to  the 
highest  crime  manifests  a  corrupted  sympathy,  re- 
jects the  decisions  of  an  honest  conscience,  and  the 
conviction  of  human  reason  in  all  ages,  and 
strengthens  the  hands  of  the  guilty  against  the  in- 
nocent. 

Yours  truly. 

"We  have  now  traveled  over  the  Philosophical,  the 
Theological,  and  Eeform  vagaries  of  Theodore  Par- 
ker, and  have  occasionally  referred  to  others  who 
are  affiliated  with  the  abnormal  moral  movements 


212     REFORMS  AND  REFORMERS. 

of  our  times.  We  laave  endeavored  to  separate  the 
pure  from  the  vile,  and  to  reject  nothing  good,  while 
we  repudiated  the  evil.  Perhaps  we  have,  in  our 
desire  to  grant  all  that  charity  demanded,  allowed 
some  things  to  stand  as  truth  which  the  better- 
informed  may  condemn  as  error.  We  have  done 
what  we  could.  To  God  and  sincere  inquirers  we 
commend  the  effort. 


LETTER    XIII. 

WRITTEN  REVELATION  A  NECESSITY  IN  ORDER  TO  THE 
MORAL  DEVELOPMENT  AND  MORAL  PROGRESS  OF 
MANKIND. 

My  Dear  Sir  : — 

You  express  a  doubt  whether  there  be  anj 
Eevelation  as  I  understand  that  word,  and  invite  a 
statement  of  "  reasons^  Health  will  scarcely  per- 
mit me  to  pursue  this  correspondence,  yet  the  hopes 
awakened  by  your  last  note  encourage  me  to  give 
"  reasons  for  the  faith  that  is  in  me." 

I  think  it  was  the  son  of  Sirach  who  said  that 
*'  all  things  are  set  over  against  each  other,"  A 
wiser  than  either  Sirach  or  his  son  says,  "  Man  was 
not  made  for  the  Sabbath,  but  the  Sabbath  for 
man." 

There  is  a  collocation  of  the  providences  of  God 
with  the  developments  of  human  life  ;  and  there  is 
an  adjustment  of  moral  appliances  and  means  to  hu- 
man faculties,  in  order  to  produce  the  progressive 
development  of  the  human  family.     Wherever  any 


214  WRITTEN    REVELATION. 

distinct  adaptation  in  the  universal  fitness  of  things, 
is  seen  to  be  harmonious  with  other  adjustments 
and  perfect  in  itself,  the  conclusion  is  infallible  that 
it  is  a  part  of  that  "  stupendous  whole"  "  whose 
builder  and  maker  is  God." 

Now,  Mr.  Parker  will  no  doubt  admit  the  validity 
of  this  principle  as  applied  to  the  natural  world ; 
but  he  will  deny  that  the  Bible  is  of  God,  and  that 
its  dispensations  have  an  adaptation  to  the  moral 
progress  of  mankind. 

With  Mr.  Parker  and  his  class  of  thinkers,  reason 
and  conscience  are  the  highest  guides  of  men  ;  with 
the  Christian,  reason  when  enlightened  by  divine 
revelation,  and  conscience  when  empowered  by  di- 
vine authority,  unite  in  the  guidance  of  men. 

Now,  in  my  opinion  this  question  can  be  settled. 
It  can  be  shown  that  the  Christian  is  right,  and  that 
the  Bible  is  a  necessary  means  in  order  to  the  de- 
velopment of  man  as  an  individual,"  and  of  mankind 
as  a  family. 

"We  inquire,  then,  is  the  Bible  of  God  ?  Was  it 
made  for  man  ? 

Let  me  premise  that  in  the  remarks  which  follow 
I  do  not  propose  to  discuss  any  question  concerning 
discrepancies  in  the  Old  Testament.  There  may  be 
historical   discrepancies    and    interpolations — there 


WEITTEN    REVELATION.  215 

may  be  fables  added  in  some  of  the  minor  books  to 
tbe  proper  matter  of  revelation — there  may  be  books 
in  the  canon  whose  places  are  not  rightly  adjusted. 
These  questions  we  leave  to  the  learned.  Men  of 
sense  will  inquire  concerning  the  only  thing  that 
is  of  vital  interest  to  them,  i.  e.,  "Was  the  dispensa- 
tion given  by  Moses  revealed  by  divine  authority 
to  the  Jews  ?  and  is  the  Christian  dispensation  a 
perfect,  ultimate,  and  obligatory  dispensation  from 
God  designed  for  all  mankind,  "  to  be  manifested 
[to  all]  in  due  timeV^ 

In  speaking  of  the  Old  Testament  as  revealed  to 
and  for  the  Jews,  we  do  not  hence  infer  that  as 
Christians  we  have  no  moral  connections  with  the  in- 
troductory dispensation.  My  views  of  this  connec- 
tion you  have  read,  and  the  Christian  public,  on 
both  sides  of  the  sea,  have  approved,  in  the  volume 
referred  to.  I  make  the  preceding  suggestions,  only 
that  your  mind  may  be  separated  from  some  things 
which  seem  to  trouble  you,  but  which  are  not  of  im- 
portance in  connection  with  our  present  inquiries. 

Mr.  Parker,  and  the  skeptics  generally,  hold  that 
reason — including  intuitional  and  reflective  reason 
■ — is  a  sufficient  guide  for  men  in  matters  relating 
to  God.  We  can  not  see  how  men  who  are  convers- 
ant with  human  history,  some  of  whom  have  made 


216  WRITTEN    REVELATION. 

pliilosopliy  a  study,  can  adopt  such  an  opinion. 
The  highest  result  that  reason  can  give  on  this 
subject  has  been  worked  out  in  such  a  variety  of 
circumstances,  that  a  man  who  fails  to  learn  a  les- 
son that  all  experience  teaches,  must  have  a  will 
over  which  reason  has,  in  some  measure,  lost  its  in- 
fluence. 

The  testimony  of  universal  experience  is,  that  all 
men  have  an  idea  of  the  existence  of  God.  But  men 
can  not  have  an  intuition  of  the  character  of  God, 
for  the  plain  reason  that  a  knowledge  of  character 
implies  comparison,  quality,  and  hence  requires  a 
process  of  reason.  It  is  a  shallow  fallacy  in  philos- 
ophy, that  Mr.  Parker  should  assume,  as  he  does, 
that  men  have  an  innate  idea  of  the  character  as 
well  as  the  being  of  God.  The  moral  duties  of  men 
to  each  other  may  be  learned  in  a  good  measure  by 
experience,  even  up  to  the  measure  of  the  golden 
rule.  I  know  the  effect  which  the  conduct  of  an- 
other has  upon  myself  I  judge  of  that  conduct, 
whether  it  is  in  itself  right  or  wrong ;  and  hence, 
by  this  process,  I  can  determine  what  would  be 
right  in  my  neighbor's  case,  were  our  circumstances 
changed.  Keasoii  is  clouded  in  men,  and  it  is  de- 
veloped slowly  in  nations  ;  hence,  while  rules  of 
human  morality  may  be  developed  by  reason,  yet 


WKITTEN     REVELATION.  217 

it  is  only  in  the  best  ages  and  in  the  highest  minds 
that  these  higher  moral  conceptions  have  appeared. 
But  the  character  of  God  and  the  duties  of  man  to 
his  Maker,  are  different  things.  Man  without  faith 
has  no  immediate  experience  of  the  divine  character, 
and  having  a  mixed  experience  by  Providence,  it  is 
absolutely  impossible  for  reason  to  clothe  the  idea 
of  God  with  the  moral  attributes  which  belong  to 
the  divine  nature. 

Now,  the  universal  experience  of  nations  and  races 
of  men  has  certified  these  facts.  The  highest  attain- 
ment of  reason  in  relation  to  God  has  been  skepti- 
cism, or  diversity.  This  was  the  result  in  India,  in 
Greece,  in  Rome,  in  France,  in  Germany,  and  in 
America.  In  all  ages  and  nations  which  have  fur- 
nished an  opportunity  for  the  ultimate  development 
of  the  reason,  the  results  have  been  the  same. 

Greece  gathered  all  the  gods  of  all  nations  into 
her  capital  city.  This  was  the  ultimatum  of  human 
reason,  in  the  direction  of.  variety.  Her  philos- 
ophers believed  in  a  divine  being ;  but,  while  they 
doubted  of  all  the  idolatries  of  the  people,  they  dif- 
fered as  much  among  themselves  as  the  people  did 
in  relation  to  prevalent  superstitions.  Such  was 
also  the  development  in  Rome.  Tully  and  others 
expressed  the  ultimatum  of  reason  in  the  affirmation, 
10 


218  WRITTEN    REVELATIOX. 

that  all  things  in  relation  to  the  gods  and  the  future 
world  were  matters  of  doubt. 

Eeason  reached  the  same  ultimatum  in  France  and 
Germany.  Revelation  in  those  countries  was  either 
forbidden  or  perverted.  The  people  followed  the 
prevailing  superstition,  while  the  philosophers 
reached  a  skepticism  that  was  malignant  and  terri- 
ble in  its  effects  on  human  character  and  human 
happiness ;  so  terrible,  that  the  people  who  had 
been  seduced  by  it,  were  glad  to  take  refuge  again 
in  the  stronghold  of  the  old  superstition,  as  the  least 
of  two  evils. 

The  highest  result  that  reason  could  attain,  un- 
aided by  revelation,  and  aided  by  all  the  light  and 
experience  of  past  ages,  was  wrought  out  fairly  in 
France.  It  was  a  complete  triumph  of  skepticism. 
Every  thing  concerning  God,  and  man,  and  the 
future  was  involved  in  utter  doubt.  Eeason  tri- 
umphed, and  ultimated  in  the  worship  of  herself, 
in  the  form  of  a  profligate  woman.  Reason  even 
doubted  her  own  affirmations  ;  and  only  enough  of 
light  was  left  to  see  the  darkness  into  which  she  had 
plunged. 

This  the  best  minds  of  the  age  stated,  in  words 
full  of  true  and  solemn  portent — words  which  should 
teach  others  to  recede  from  the  abyss  into  which 


WKITTEN    REVELATION.  219 

these   skeptical  pTiilosophers    looked    before    they 
fell* 

In  Great  Britain  and  America  skepticism  can  not 

*  Diderot,  dying  after  a  life  of  doubt  and  disappointment,  said  to 
friends  that  stood  by  his  couch  to  close  his  eyes  in  the  last  sleep,  "I 
am  about  to  take  a  leap  in  the  dark." 

The  justly -celebrated  Rousseau  uttered  a  striking  description  of 
the  results  of  skepticism,  and  the  moral  character  and  aim  of  skeptics. 
It  is  true  to  life,  and  true  for  all  time — a  picture  of  the  highest  pro- 
duct of  reason  unaided  by  revelation. 

lie  said : 

"  I  have  consulted  our  philosophers,  I  have  perused  their  books, 
I  have  examined  their  several  opinions.  I  have  found  them  all 
proud,  positive,  and  dogmatizing,  even  in  their  pretended  skepti- 
cism, knowing  every  thing,  proving  nothing,  and  ridiculing  one  an- 
other ;  and  this  is  the  only  point  in  which  they  concur,  and  in 
which  they  are  right.  Daring  when  they  attack,  they  defend  them- 
selves without  vigor.  If  you  consider  their  arguments,  they  have 
none  but  for  destruction ;  if  you  count  their  number,  each  one  is  re- 
duced to  himself;  they  never  unite  but  to  dispute ;  to  listen  to 
them  was  not  the  way  to  relieve  myself  from  my  doubts.  I  con- 
ceive that  the  insuflflciency  of -the  human  understanding  was  the 
first  cause  of  this  prodigious  diversity  of  sentiment,  and  that  pride 
was  the  second.  If  our  philosophers  were  able  to  discover  truth, 
which  of  them  would  interest  himself  about  it  ?  Each  of  them 
knows  that  his  system  is  not  better  established  than  the  others ; 
but  he  supports  it  because  it  is  his  own :  there  is  not  one  among 
them  who,  coming  to  distinguish  truth  from  falsehood,  would  not 
prefer  his  own  error  to  the  truth  that  is  discovered  by  another. 
"Where  is  the  philosopher  who,  for  his  own  glory,  would  not  willingly 
deceive  the  whole  human  race  ?  "Where  is  he  who,  in  the  secret  of 
his  heart,  proposes  any  other  object  than  his  own  distinction  ?  Pro- 
vided he  can  but  raise  himself  above  the  commonalty,  provided  he 
can  echpse  his  competitor,  he  has  reached  the  summit  of  his  ambition. 
The  great  thing  for  him  is  to  think  differently  from  other  people. 
Among  behevers  he  is  an  atheist,  among  atheists  a  behever.     Shun, 


220  WRITTEN    REVELATION. 

become  so  prevalent,  because  in  these  countries 
Christianity  is  better  understood  ;  and  wherie  it  docs 
prevail,  it  will  seek  to  attach  to  itself  many  of  the 
virtues  which  Christianity  has  introduced  :  but  the 
result  of  the  unguided  reason  can  in  no  circum- 
stances be  any  thing  better  than  doubt,  varied  in  its 
form  by  the  diversity  of  the  different  minds  that 
propagate  it.  Which  one  of  the  English  skeptics 
agreed  with  another  in  respect  to  the  character  of 
God  or  human  duty  ?*  Who  agrees  wdth  Theodore 
Parker  or  Joseph  Barker  in  America?  No  one 
ever  did  or  ever  can.  Skeptics  agree  in  doubt,  but 
they  can  not  agree  concerning  the  things  about 
which   they  doubt.     The   effort  to  propound  any 

shun  then  those  who,  under  pretense  of  explaining  nature,  sow  in 
the  hearts  of  men  tiie  most  dispiriting-  doctrines,  whose  skepticism  is 
far  more  affirmative  and  dogmatical  than  the  decided  tone  of  their 
adversaries.  Under  pretense  of  being  themselves  the  only  people 
enlightened,  they  imperiously  subject  us  to  their  magisterial  decis- 
ions, and  would  fain  palm  upon  us  for  the  true  causes  of  things 
the  unintelligible  systems  they  have  erected  in  their  own  heads; 
while  they  overturn,  destroy,  and  trample  under  foot  all  tliat  man- 
kind reveres,  snatch  from  tlie  afflicted  the  onl}''  comfort  left  them  in 
their  misery,  from  the  rich  and  great  the  only  curb  that  can  restrain 
their  passions ;  tear  from  the  heart  all  remorse  of  vice,  all  hopes  of 
virtue,  and  still  boast  tliomselves  tlie  beneflictors  of  mankind. 
'  Truth,'  they  say,  '  is  never  hurtful  to  man.'  I  believe  tliat  as  well 
as  they,  and  the  same,  in  my  opinion,  is  a  proof  that  what  they 
teach  is  not  the  truth." 
*  See  Leland  and  Gregory. 


WRITTEN    REVELATION.  221 

thing  positive  is,  in  all  cases,  a  failure  ;  and  in  most 
cases — as  in  Priestley's  form  of  worship  and  Parker's 
philosophy  of  God — the  effort  is  ridiculous  as  it  is 
futile.  The  wandering  mind  feels  the  need  of  some- 
thing positive  in  religion ;  and  having  rejected  re- 
vealed truth,  it  seeks  to  attain  from  reason  such 
baseless  dogmas  as  Parker's  "  idea,  sense,  and  con- 
ception of  God."  The  mind  of  man  was  made  to 
rest  in  faith  ;  and  when  skepticism  deprives  men  of 
this  support,  the  soul  feels  more  of  unrest  and  de- 
privation than  do  the  heathen,  who  rest  in  a  false 
fiith.  Unaided  reason  can  doubt,  but  it  can  not 
afl&rm  any  thing  in  relation  to  God  and  the  future 
that  will  satisfy  the  soul. 

Man  was  not  made  to  be  the  victim  of  skepticism, 
neathenism  is  better  than  this,  just  as  ignorance  is 
better  than  aberration.  Eevelation  was  made  for 
man  ;  made  to  elevate  the  races  progressively,  from 
a  state  of  nature  to  a  state  of  grace  ;  made  to  spread 
from  families  to  nations,  and  finally  to  reach  all 
mankind. 

But  leaving  strictures  on  doubt  and  negation, 
winch  are  to  positive  religion  as  night  is  to  the  day, 
let  us  look  at  some  thoughts  which  may  prepare  us 
more  iutelHgently  to  consider  the  positive  side  of 
the  argument,  which  maintains  that  the  Christian 


222  "WRITTEN    REVELATION. 

Scriptures  are  a  revelation  from  God,  containing  the 
ultimate  rule  of  faith  and  dut}'. 

All  things  are  progressive  in  their  development. 
Individually  or  socially  considered,  in  the  life-history 
of  things  there  is  an  infancy,  j'outh,  and  maturity. 
"  First  the  blade,  then  the  ear,  then  the  fall  corn  in 
the  ear."  The  Scriptures  affirm  this  principle.  The 
family  of  man  are,  as  a  family,  subject  to  this  law. 
There  are  ages  of  infancy,  of  youth  or  tuition,  and 
of  maturity.  The  first  law  would  be  one  relating 
to  animal  wants,  and  adapted  to  the  period  of  child- 
hood. Hence  the  law,  "  Thou  shalt  not  eat  forbid- 
den fruit,"  and  those  of  similar  character.  Hence 
the  name  of  God  as  Al-Shaddi,  God  of  Power,  or 
God  of  Nature,  as  known  to  the  patriarchs. 

The  second  dispensation  would  be  adapted  to 
man's  tuition  in  the  next  stage  of  development. 
Hence  the  Mosaic:  which,  as  pictures  in  a  child's 
primer,  with  explanations  attached ;  and  a  written 
moral  law  in  the  briefest  form,  gave  to  man  a  more 
perfect  idea  of  God  and  of  moral  duties. 

The  third  stage  would  be  the  ultimate  and  per- 
fect— "  the  full  corn  in  the  ear." 

The  first  stage,  or  patriarchal,  would  develop  it- 
self from  the  family  into  a  nation  ;  the  second  from. 
the  nation  to  all  nations. 


WRITTEN    REVELATION".  223 

-  Men  of  the  Christian  age,  together  with  the  knowl- 
edge of  their  own  dispensation,  get  the  knowledge 
generated  and  transmitted  by  the  two  preceding 
ones.  The  foundation-principles  of  these  were  de- 
veloped into  the  final  and  perfect  form  of  Chris- 
tianity. 

Tlie  vital  importance  of  the ^amzYy— especially  its  * 
law  of  dnty  and  obedience — is  developed  fully  in 
the  first  dispensation,  Abraham  is  chosen  because 
he  will  instruct  and  command  his  children  (Gen. 
xviii.  19).  In  all  ages  of  revelation  this  important 
principle  needed  to  be  understood.  Families  trained 
to  obey  righteous  authority,  and  having  their  con- 
sciences and  hearts  nurtured  by  the  admonition  and 
fear  of  God,  are  the  anchor-hope  of  a  free  state. 

Man  needs  to  know  also  the  relation  of  a  state, 
as  a  whole,  to  the  divine  government ;  that  every 
state  has  its  probation ;  that  departure  from  right- 
eous principle  will,  in  the  end,  bring  dissolution  and 
disaster.  This  is  the  teaching  of  the  national  his- 
tory of  Israel.  It  exhibits  to  all  ages  the  principles 
upon  which  God  administers  his  govermnent  over 
favored  nations,  and  the  discipline  which  they  must 
incur  for  national  offenses  against  justice  and  mercy. 

These  three  stages  of  development  are  likewise 
exhibited  in  individuals.     There  is  first  the  animal, 


224  WRITTEN    REVELATION. 

when  animal  appetite  governs.  Second,  the  intel- 
lectual period  of  growth,  when  law  and  penalty 
governs.  Third  (for  those  who  rise  to  it),  a  dis- 
pensation of  love  and  fruit-bearing,  when  faith 
governs. 

There  are  likewise  the  lineaments  of  these  three 
stages  in  the  advance  of  each  individual  that  enters 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  on  earth.  An  illustration 
is  furnished  in  the  experience  of  Paul.  Before  he 
became  a  Jew  spiritually,  i.  e.,  before  he  apprehended 
the  law  as  being  from  God,  and  obligatory  upon  his 
mind,  he  was  free  from  a  sense  of  sin  ;  he  was  sen- 
sual, governed  by  his  own  natural  impulses.  Sec- 
ond, when  he  realized  the  spirituality  of  the  law,  he 
became  a  true  Pharisee ;  felt  condemned  for  sin  ; 
and  endeavored  to  escape  condemnation  by  works 
of  law.  Third,  he  was  made  free  by  faith  ;  and  that 
which  before  was  a  work  of  the  intellect  and  will, 
without  inward  love  and  impulse,  now  became  easy 
and  holy,  being  prompted  by  love  which  was  pro- 
duced by  faith  in  Christ.  Through  this  process,  in 
some  degree,  passes  every  individual  who  rises /;-om 
nature  through  conviction  into  grace. 

Hence  also  the  three  developments  of  the  name 
of  Jehovah.  Al-Shaddai,  God  of  nature  or  of  power. 
Second,  Jehovah.     A  development  of  the  same  name 


WRITTEN    REVELATION".  225 

known  to  the  fathers  (Ex.  vi.  3)  ;  biit,  in  the  sec- 
ond dispensation,  to  be  changed  from  Al-Shaddai 
to  Jehovah,  who  now  developed  himself  in  moral 
law  and  tuition.  In  the  third.  Father,  Son,  and 
IIoI//  Spirit — ^the  God  of  power,  and  developed  by 
law  and  tuition  into  the  God  of  grace.  Thus  bj 
the  progressive  development  of  the  divine  char- 
actei',  has  the  human  mind  been  raised  through  the 
first  and  second,  into  the  third  and  ultimate  state 
of  knowledge. 

AYith  these  preliminary  remarks,  I  invite  your 
attention  to  the  following  train  of  thought,  as  proof 
of  the  Necessity  of  a  Written  Revelation. 

I  have  in  my  published  volumes  discussed  the  de- 
tails of  the  statements  which  follow.  An  outline 
view  will  indicate  the  course  of  thought  which  you 
will  find  more  fully  and  carefully  stated  in  the  vol- 
umes which  I  send  you. 

Every  species  of  nature  may  be  cultivated.  Its 
properties  or  faculties  may  be  improved.  This  is 
true  in  a  general  sense  ;  and  especially  true  as  we 
rise  toward  the  higher  species.  But  the  improve- 
ment of  any  species  must  come  from  one  higher 
than  itself.  There  may  be  choice  individuals  pro- 
10* 


226  .■WRITTEN    REVELATION. 

duced  by  chance  circumstances,  but  no  species  can 
raise  litself  above  its  natural  level. 

Now,  a  difetinguisliing  characteristic  of  man  is, 
that  he  is  both  a  cultivable  and  a  cultivating  being. 
He  cultivates  the  species  of  nature  fitted  to  his  use, 
while  he  himself  is  capable  of  moral  culture. 

But  as  it  requires  man's  superior  powers  of  in- 
tellect and  example  to  cultivate  the  orders  below 
him,  and  raise  them  above  their  natural  condition, 
so  it  requires  the  powers  of  a  being  above  man  to 
elevate  him,  a^  a  moral  being,  into  a  new  sphere  of 
thought  and  feeling.  The  conclusion,  therefore, 
arises  not  only  from  the  analogy  but  from  the  neces- 
sittj  of  things,  that  man  cultivates  nature,  and  Christ 
cultivates  man. 

But  what  are  the  means  of  culture  adapted  to 
man's  nature  as  a  moral  being?  There  are  four, 
namely,  written  language^  faith,  conscience,  and  ex- 
ample. Faith  and  conscience  are  subjective  sus- 
ceptibilities, and  written  language  and  example  are 
objective  means  answering  to  them;  And  by  the 
interaction  of  these,  man  may  be  cultivated  into  the 
sphere  of  a  superior  species.  But  the  external 
means  must  be  exercised  by  an  agency  superior  to 
himself,  or  he  will  never  rise  above  his  natural 
selfish  and  earthly  nature. 


WRITTEN    REVELATION.  227 

Notice  tlie  facts  and  their  application.  Written, 
or  sign-language,  is  generally  supposed  to  be  a  nat- 
ural product  of  the  human  reason.  However  this 
may  be,  it  is  certain  that  men,  after  they  have  at- 
tained a  settled  social  condition,  always  form  for 
themselves  a  language  of  signs.  Without  this  they 
can  not  ascend  from  the  first  stages  of  barbarism. 
Fixed  signs  of  thought  are  necessary  before  there 
can  be  commercial  progress,  forms  of  law,  or  fixed 
moral  principles. 

Sign -language  is  one  of  the  distinguishing  char- 
acteristics of  the  human  species.  Animals  below 
man  can  communicate  to  each  other  certain  ideas, 
but  they  can  not  impress  upon  external  objects,  and 
thus  transmit  to  others,  a  fixed  sign  of  their  thought. 

If,  then,  sign-language  is  a  characteristic  of  man, 
and  if  he  can  not  be  elevated  from  barbarism  to 
social  and  civil  position  without  it,  it  would  be 
absurd  to  suppose  that  his  moral  culture  can  be 
accomplished  without  this  necessary  medium. 

Hence,  so  soon  as  the  primitive  nations  became 
settled,  and  so  soon  as  sign-languages  were  matured, 
God  gave  to  man,  in  order  to  his  moral  progress,  a 
written  record  of  the  past — of  his  character,  and  of 
his  will;  and  these,  together  with  new  and  progress- 
ive spiritual  ideas  generated  by  forms  and  external 


228  "WKITTEN    REVELATION, 

types,  were  rendered  permanent  in  sign-language, 
and  transmitted  to  the  future  b}^  the  ritual  dispen- 
sation of  Moses. 

The  second  characteristic  which  distinguishes  man 
from  irrational  beings,  is  faith.  Animals  receive 
their  knowledge  through  the  senses  ;  man  receives 
most  of  his  knowledge  by  credence.*  All  the  ex- 
perience of  the  past  is  given  to  him  by  faith  in 
testimony.  It  is  faith  alone  that  connects  man  with 
the  past  and  the  future — with  God  and  the  spiritual 
world.  Faith  depends  on  written  language  to  reach 
the  past,  and  on  hope  to  reach  the  future,  and  on 
written  revelation  to  know  God.  Man  is  a  believing 
being  by  creation  ;  and  without  faith  he  is  no  bet- 
ter than  the  brute — with  a  bad  faith  he  is  worse. 

Faith  is  the  spiritual  sense.  By  it  spiritual  ob- 
jects become  subjective  in  the  soul,  as  external 
physical  objects  become  subjective  by  sense.  By 
faith  in  revealed  truth,  the  character  of  God  be- 
comes a  conscious  entity  in  the  soul.  "  Faith  works 
by  love."  "  He  that  loveth  knoweth  God,  for  God 
is  love."  Thus  by  fliith  the  character  of  God,  and 
the  life  and  precepts  of  God  recorded  in  divine  reve- 

*  Tliere  is  a  class  of  philosophers  who  contend  that  they  receive 
all  their  knowledge  through  tlio  souses.  By  this  method  men  may 
approximate  a.iimal  natures ;  but  the  distinguishing  characteristic 
betw.^en  sense  and  sphit  can  never  be  entirely  obliterated. 


W  KITTEN    KEY  ELATION,  229 

lation,  become  united  in  the  moral  culture  of  man. 
In  this  way  the  subjective  susceptibility  of  faith  is 
met  by  the  objective  actuality  of  divine  revelation. 

Mark,  now,  that  without  divine  truth  externally 
revealed,  the  susceptibility  of  faith'is  injurious  and 
evil  to  man.  Faith  controls  man's  character  and 
his  life.  If  I  believe  my  neighbor  to  be  a  bad 
man,  I  will  feel  as  though  he  were  so.  If  a  Catholic 
believes  he  ought  to  confess  to  the  Virgin  Mary,  his 
conscience  will  reprove  him  if  he  does  not  do  so. 
Faith  forms  man's  character  and  his  conscience  in 
accordance  with  what  the  man  believes,  whether 
that  be  true  or  false.  Faith  of  itself  is^ blind ;  it 
needs  a  guide  as  much  as  a  blind  man  needs  eyes. 
Without  revealed  religion  as  the  guide  of  faith, 
"  the  blind  lead  the  blind,  and  both  fall  into  the 
ditch." 

But  faith  is  connected  with  conscience  as  well  as 
with  sign-language  in  the  moral  development  of 
man.  This  brings  us  to  the  third  fact  in  the  means 
of  human  culture.  There  are  two  elements  in  ef- 
ficient faith — one  the  external  fact,  the  other  the 
divine  authority  of  the  fact.  Conscience  will  re- 
spond to  no  truth  unless  faith  delivers  it  as  coming 
from  God.  Great  souls,  such  as  Plato,  Seneca,  and 
Tully,  have  spoken  great  truths  ;  but  who  cared  for 


230  "WRITTEN    REVELATION. 

these  ?  None  but  those  who  did  not  need  them. 
These  were  men  like  others — liable  to  mistakes — 
could  give  only  their  opinions — had  no  authority 
over  men.  Their  sayings,  therefore,  could  neither 
awaken  or  guide»the  conscience. 

God  has  so  constituted  the  soul,  that  conscience 
will  enforce  no  truth  upon  the  life  with  efficiency, 
unless  it  has  God  in  it.  The  moment  faith  sees  God 
in  truth,  that  moment  conscience  awakes  and  en- 
forces it  as  a  duty.  Jesus  Christ  himself  did  not  teach 
that  his  truth  would  have  full  reforming  efficacy 
until  after  his  resurrection.  He  taught  that  by  his 
resurrection  and  the  advent  of  the  Spirit,  the  evi- 
dence of  divine  authority  would  be  given  to  his 
truth,  and  then  it  would  attain  new  power  and  ap- 
plication in  the  souls  of  men.  Truth  alone  has  no 
power  with  the  conscience.  When  truth  comes  in 
the  name  of  God,  then  conscience  awakes  and  en- 
forces obedience. 

But  mark,  now.  Conscience,  like  faith,  is  blind 
without  a  guide,  and  with  a  blind  guide  it  is  doubly 
blind.  If  a  man  believe  in  no  God,  he  will  have 
no  conscience  in  relation  to  any  religious  duty.  If 
he  believe  his  god  sanctions  theft,  as  do  the  devo- 
tees of  Kale,  he  will  steal.  If  he  believe  his  god 
sanctions  child-sacrifice,  conscience  will  enforce  the 


WRITTEN    REVELATION.  231 

nmrder,  even  against  the  parental  instinct.  So  faith, 
governs  conscience,  and  both  are  false  and  foul 
without  truth.  With  truth  recognized  as  being 
only  of  human  origin,  faith  is  dead  and  conscience 
inefficient.  Hence,  the  truth,  and  not  only  the  truth, 
but  God-revealed  truth — the  truth  of  God  in  written 
language — is  the  only  true  guide  of  the  soul. 

God  has  so  constituted  the  soul  that  a  written 
revelation  is  required  in  order  to  moral  progress. 
As  God  is  true,  that  revelation  would  be  given. 
As  God  is  true,  that  revelation  has  been  given  in 
the  Christian  Scriptures.  A  revelation  of  truth  in 
progressive  dispensations,  up  to  the  perfect  in  love, 
in  precept,  and  in  example. 

We  come  now  to  the  fourth  requisite  in  order  to 
the  moral  culture  of  man — a  perfect  example  of  hu- 
man duty. 

Theory  is  never  perfect  without  example.  Oliver 
Evans  could  not  give  his  perfect  theory  of  a  steam- 
mill,  and  say  to  any  one  who  understood  his  words 
and  his  plan,  "  Go  and  build  a  mill,"  His  common- 
sense  would  teach  him  that  the  2^'^<^ctice  has  to  be 
learned  as  well  as  the  theory.  The  master-workman 
must  take  the  saw  and  hatchet,  and  practice  the  theory 
in  the  presence  of  the  pupil,  and  put  the  learner 
through  the  routine  of  the  labor.     So  in  all  things : 


232  WRITTEN    REVELATION. 

theory  is  only  a  part  of  knowledp:e ;  the  practice 
has  to  be  learned  by  example.  So  in  religion.  "We 
needed  not  only  the  precept,  but  the  example  under 
the  precept.  This  Christ  has  given.  In  the  New 
Testament,  Jesus  is  seen  practicing  the  divine  pre- 
cept, and  saying  to  his  disciples,  "  Follow  me." 

Again,  example  is  needed  not  onlj^  of  moral  dutr, 
but  of  the  spirit  in  which  duty  is  to  be  discharged. 
This  also  is  given  in  the  New  Testament. 

Again,  as  precepts  must  be  general  in  their  na- 
ture, there  are  many  specific  applications  of  them 
which  men  could  not  know  were  it  not  for  the  ex- 
ample of  Christ.  "When  a  son  knows  the  character, 
and  spirit,  and  motives  of  his  father,  he  will  be 
able  to  judge,  in  his  absence^  what  his  father  would 
do  in  specific  cases,  and  hence  what  he  would  have 
him  do.  So  the  example  and  spirit  of  Christ  is  a 
sure  guide  to  his  disciples  in  applying  his  precepts 
to  the  specific  duties  of  life.  When  the  believing 
mind  inquires,  what  would  Christ  have  me  do  in 
this  case?  the  life  and  Spirit  of  Jesus,  revealed  in 
the  Scriptures,  will  guide  to  the  right  conclusion. 

But,  finally,  and  above  all,  in  order  to  man's  con- 
tinued progress  toward  the  perfect,  he  needs  an  ex- 
ample that  is  ever  above  him — the  example  of  ono 
whose  excellence  will  show  him  his  defects,  and  whose 


REFORMS  AND  REFORMERS.     233 

love  and  proffered  aid  will  invite  him  to  higher  at- 
tainments. Faith  in  Christ's  example  induces  a  sense 
of  un worthiness,  at  the  same  time  that  foith  in  his  sac- 
rifice for  us,  moves  the  soul  bj  love,  and  induces  self- 
denial  for  others.  This  is  the  true  Christian  conscious- 
ness^ and  highest  moral  condition,    (Matt.  xi.  28-30.) 

No  one  will  doubt  but  that  a  sense  of  present  im- 
perfection and  a  struggle  for  higher  attainment  in 
holiness,  is  the  method  of  moral  progress.  Now,  at 
the  entrance  of  the  straight  gate  that  leads  to  life 
stands  the  Saviour  of  men.  He  is  ever  before  his 
disciples.  The  light  of  his  perfect  character  shows 
them  their  defects.  The  love  of  his  heart  strength- 
ens and  encourages  by  the  way.  The  mark  of  the 
prizj  of  their  high  calling  is  to  attain  the  perfection 
of  his  character  ;  and  to  those  who  are  running  the 
race  with  whatever  of  knowledge  and  strength  they 
possess,  the  divine  favor  and  the  divine  providence 
are  a  conscious  blessing  and  constant  guard. 

Thus,  my  dear  sir,  I  think  it  is  jDlain  that  the 
Bible  was  made  for  man  ;  that  it  possesses  the  char- 
acteristics which  are  adapted  to  develop  his  moral 
faculties  up  to  the  perfect.  A  revealed  written  reve- 
lation is  a  necessity  of  man's  moral  nature.  The 
Bible  meets  the  necessity  of  the  case,  and  therefore 
the  Bible  is  of  God.  Yours  truly. 


LETTER    XIV. 

REVELATIOlSr  THE   MOTIVE-POWER  m  HUMAN  PRO- 
GRESS. 

My  Dear  Sir  : — 

I  did  not  purpose  to  trouble  you  with  an- 
other letter ;  but  your  last  note  brings  to  view  a 
point  where  I  think  you  and  many  others  have 
fallen  into  a  grave  misapprehension.  That  point  is 
expressed  in  the  paragraph  quoted  below.  I  will 
not  open  again  the  discussion  in  relation  to  those 
professing  Christians  whom  you  charge  with  com- 
plicity with  sin.  A  word  or  two  with  reference  to 
alleged  Bible  authority  for  slavery,  and  then  I  shall 
show — I  hope  conclusively — that  the  "  facts"  are  not 
"  against  my  logic,"  as  you  allege,  but  that  they  sus- 
tain, decisively,  the  views  to  which  you  seem  to 
think  they  are  opposed. 

You  say  :  "  Almost  thou  persuadest  me  to  believe 
a  Written  Eevelation  necessary.  Bat  I  put  facts 
against  logic.  How  happens  it,  if  the  Bible  be  a 
book  of  revealed  religion,  that  progressive  move- 


REVELATION    AND    HUMAN    PROGRESS.     235 

ments  are  generally  led  by  those  who  do  not  hold 
your  views  of  the  Bible  ?  How  happens  it  that  re- 
formers have  to  advance  against  the  resistance  and 
denouncements  of  the  most  influential  churches, 
who  often  justify  wrong  by  the  Bible  ;  as  you  know 
has  been  the  case  in  the  anti-slavery  discussion  in 
this  country.  It  is  true  that  while  they  defend 
slavery  by  the  Bible,  many  of  them  profess  to  be 
opposed  to  slavery  ;  but  in  this  they  are  either 
hj'pocrites  or  accusers  of  their  own  book  :  for  if  the 
Bible  (as  I  think  it  does)  sanctions  the  practice  of 
slaveholding,  they  ought  to  defend  the  institution. 
By  condemning  it,  they  condemn  their  own  Scrip- 
tures." 

Now,  sir,  I  admit,  as  you  know,  to  some  extent, 
your  allegation  against  the  American  churches  ;  but 
I  deny  its  application  entirely  to  the  true  church  of 
Christ.  'It  has  always  been  the  few  who,  in  the 
martyr  ages  of  human  progress,  have  stood  and 
achieved  the  victory,  both  against  church  and  state ; 
but  those  few  have  stood  in  the  light  of  the  Bible, 
and  have  succeeded  by  the  power  of  conscience 
strengthened  by  Bible  faith.  In  relation  to  those 
who  seek  to  sanction  sin  by  the  Bible,  it  proves 
nothing  now,  any  more  than  it  did  iu  the  time  of 
the  prophets,  and  of  Christ.     Neander,  who,  I  be- 


236      REVELATION    THE    MOTIVE- POWER 

lieve,  is  held  in  higli  esteem  by  you,  somewhere 
says  that  men  interpret  the  Scriptures  by  their  own 
hearts.  This  is  a  true  saying.  The  moral  disposi- 
tion of  a  man  will  determine  what  use  he  will  make 
of  the  Bible. 

A  certain  kind  of  servitude  was  no  doubt  ad- 
mitted by  Moses.  By  the  necessities  of  the  Mosaic 
economy,  the  soil  belonged  to  Israelites.  The  re- 
version land  law  returned  the.  fee  of  the  farms  in 
Israel  to  the  family  of  the  original  holder,  at  the 
end  of  each  fifty  years.  Strangers,  therefore,  among 
the  Jews,  had  to  seek  labor  and  subsistence  as 
servants.  Hence  there  was  a  life  servitude,  or  a 
servitude  until  the  Jubilee,  but  the  Jubilee  freed  all 
the  in/iahitanis  of  the  land.  Hence  there  could  be 
no  such  thing  (and  there  was  no  such  thing)  as  an 
accumulation  of  slaves  in  Israel.  Beside  this,  the 
mitigations  of  the  law  of  Moses  (and  especially  the 
law  forbidding  the  return  of  fugitives)  alleviated, 
even  in  the  dispensation  "  which  made  nothing  per- 
fect," the  fearful  rigors  of  the  slavery  which  existed 
in  that  age.  A  servant,  being  of  the  same  color 
with  his  master,  if  he  were  misused,  could  escape  to 
Israel  or  from  Israel,  and  the  "  fugitive  law"  (the 
opposite  of  ours)  forbade  his  return. 

But  the  dispensation  of  Moses  was  inspired  for 


IN    HUMAN    PROGRESS.  237 

that  age,  and  for  tlie  Jews.  It  was  only  a  stage  of 
progress  toward  the  perfection  of  the  gospel.  He 
is  either  an  ignorant  man  or  a  sinner,  who  endeav- 
ors to  justify  slavery  under  the  gospel  by  any 
servitude  which  may  have  existed  during  the  intro- 
ductory dispensation.  K slavery  may  thus  be  jus- 
tified, so  may  polygamy.  Beside,  if  the  Bible  tol- 
erates slavery,  it  is  the  slavery  of  poor  whites,  not 
of  negroes.  Its  servitude  was  predicated  on  con- 
dition, not  color.  Every  man,  therefore,  who  at- 
tempts to  justify  slavery  by  the  Bible,  should  be 
held  responsible  for  teaching  that  the  enslavement 
of  the  poor  is  justified  by  the  Scriptures. 

There  are  those,  I  know,  who  justify  American 
slavery  by  the  New  Testament.  For  such  men, 
educated  in  the  slave  States,  I  could  find  an  apology ; 
but  for  northern  Christians  who  hold  such  senti- 
ments, argument  is  not  the  thing  needed.  In  the 
divine  government  pardon  or  penalty  is  the  issue 
with  them. 

They  tell  us  that  "  Christ  regulated  slavery ;" 
that  "  he  gave  precepts  regulating  the  conduct  of 
the  master  and  the  slave  in  their  several  relations." 
So  he  regulated  assault  and  battery,  and  gave  pre- 
cepts that,  when  a  man  is  smitten  on  the  one  cheek, 
he  should  turn  the  other.     Has  he,  therefore,  justi- 


238      REVELATION    THE    MOTIVE-POWER 

fied  assault  and  "battery  ?  Christ  abrogated  slavery 
by  the  golden  rule — by  placing  all  men  upon  the 
platform  of  civil  equality — ^by  making  it  a  funda- 
mental tenet  of  his  religion  that  those  who  had 
privileges  should  labor  to  elevate  others  up  to  their 
own  position  ;  and  thus  practically  love  their  neigh- 
bor as  themselves.  Slavery  is  expressly  abrogated 
in  the  epistle  to  Philemon,  who  is  required  to  re- 
ceive his  old  servant  "  not  now  as  a  servant^''^  but  as 
a  brother  man  and  a  brother  Christian.  The  6th 
chapter  of  first  Timothy  you  have  translated  rightly. 
The  first  verses  teach  as  distinctly  as  any  words  can 
convey  the  same  truth,  that  those  servants  who  had 
^^helieving  masters'^  were  not  "under  the  yoke"  of 
slavery,  as  were  those  whose  masters  had  not  re- 
ceived the  gospel.  Those  who  had  not  believing 
masters  are  exhorted  to  endure  their  affliction  for 
Christ's  sake ;  and  those  who  had  "  believing  mas- 
ters'^ are  exhorted  (as  emancipated  slaves  are  in  the 
West  Indies)  still  to  labor  for  their  old  masters, 
rather  than  for  another ;  because  their  master  was 
"  now  a  brother  /^  and  as  the  benejit  of  their  labor  had 
to  be  given  to  some  one,  it  was  a  Christian  duty  to 
prefer  that  the  believing  master  should  receive  that 
benefit. 

If  they  were  still  considered  slaves  in  the  legal 


IN    HUMAN    PROGRESS.  239 

sense,  sucli  an  exhortation  to  tlae  •  two  different 
classes  would  be  absurd.  Those  who  had  believing 
masters  were  evidently  no  longer  held  "  under  the 
joke"  of  involuntary  servitude. 

But  let  us  pass  to  the  main  and  ultimate  question 
as  to  the  facts.  Has  not  the  Bible  given  impulse 
and  direction  in  every  successful  effort  that  has 
ever  been  made  for  the  moral  progress  of  man- 
kind ?  Let  us  see  whether  "  the  facts  are  against 
my  logic." 

The  Bible  itself^  as  you  know,  claims  that  its 
Tuission  is  to  enlighten  the  world,  and  to  advance  the 
moral  interests  of  the  human  family.  As  this  is  a 
Bible  topic,  I  can  do  no  better  than  remodel  for  you 
a  discourse  recently  delivered  upon  this  particular 
subject.  I  ask  your  attention  to  the  discriminations 
which  it  makes,  and  to  the  facts  by  which  the  con- 
clusion is  reached.  We  have  shown,  as  we  think, 
that  human  nature  is  so  constituted,  that  revealed 
religion  is  necessary  in  order  to  the  moral  develop- 
ment of  our  race.  Do  historical  facts  verify  this 
conclusion  ? 

"We  have  said  that  the  Bible  claims  to  be  both 
light  and  power  in  the  moral  progress  of  the  world. 
I  wish  you  would  observe  this,  because  in  some  of 
your  letters  you  speak  of  the  orthodox  party  claim- 


240      REVELATION    THE    MOTIVE-POWER 

ing  more  for  the  Bible  than  it  claims  for  itself. 
This  may  be  true  when  some  eulogists  of  revelation 
claim  for  it  extraordinary  excellences  of  style,  and 
other  extrinsic  matters  of  that  sort.  But  it  is  not 
true  in  regard  to  the  claim  of  moral  light  and  power. 
Tlie  Bible  does  claim  these,  and  all  friends  of  revela- 
tion should  claim  them  for  it.     Notice  this. 

The  Old  Testament  writers  speak  of  their  own 
dispensation  as  the  light  of  theii-  age  ;  and  the  minds 
of  the  old  prophets  glow  with  inspiration  when  they 
refer  to  the  increased  light  and  purity  of  Messiah's 
age — an  age  when  "  the  light  of  the  moon  was  to 
be  as  the  light  of  the  sun,  and  the  sun  itself  would 
shine  with  sevenfold  effulgence."  "  To  the  people 
that  sat  in  darkness  and  in  the  valley  and  the 
shadow  of  death,"  they  declared  that  a  "light  would 
spring  up."  About  the  last  utterance  of  the  last  of 
the  prophets  refers  to  the  purifying  power  of  the 
Messiah's  dispensation,  and  to  the  spiritual  light 
which  would  be  revealed  in  his  day.  (Mai.  iii.  1, 
2,)  "  Behold  I  will  send  my  messenger  before  me 
[John  Baptist],  and  he  shall  prepare  the  way  before 
me ;  and  the  Lord  [Messiah]  whom  ye  seek  shall 
suddenly  come  to  his  temple ;  even  the  messenger 
of  the  covenant  whom  ye  delight  in :  behold !  he 
shaH^come,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts  I     (2)  But  who 


IN    HUMAN    PKOaKESS.  241 

may  abide  the  day  of  Lis  coming  ?  and  wlio  shall 
stand  when  he  appeareth  ?  For  he  shall  be  like  a 
refiner^ s fire  and  like  fuUe7-^s  soap;  and  he  shall  sit 
as  a  refiner  and  purifier  of  silver.''''  That  is,  the  Mes- 
siah's dispensation  would  purify  and  elevate  those 
who  were  subjects  of  its  influence.  And  (ch.  iv.  2, 
3)  while  the  wicked  would  be  condemned  and  de- 
stroyed, , "  to  those  who  feared  the  Lord  the  Sun  of 
righteousness  would  arise  with  healing  in  his 
beams." 

To  this  light  of  the  old  dispensation  the  people 
who  first  heard  the  gospel,  and  who  lived  in  the 
transition  period  (from  the  death  of  Christ  to  the 
fall  of  Jerusalem)  were  exhorted  to  take  heed. 
Although  it  shone  in  a  darker  dispensation,  yet  it 
was  a  "  lamp"  in  the  path  that  led  to  a  fuller  mani- 
festation of  divine  love  and  truth.  This  view  of  the 
relations  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  light  the 
Apostle  Peter  beautifully  expresses  in  his  second 
letter,  chap.  i.  19,  "  We  have  also  a  more  sure  word 
of  prophecy,  whereunto  ye  do  well  that  ye  take 
heed,  as  unto  a  light  that  shineth  in  a  dark  place 
[age],  UNTIL  the  day  dawn,  and  the  day-star  [of  the 
gospel  dispensation]  arise  in  your  hearts."  The 
Old  Testament  dispensation — as  interpi^eted  by  the 

inspired  prophets — was  as  a  light  in  the  night.     The 
11 


242      REVELATION    THE    MOTIVE -POWER 

New  Dispensation  was  daylight,  whicli  was  then 
dawnino;  in  the  hearts  of  behevers. 

John  Baptist,  the  forerunner  of  Jesus,  who  came 
to  reprove  his  nation  and  to  call  them  to  repentance, 
as  the  proper  preparation  for  the  reign  of  Messiah, 
was  called  "a  burning  and  a  shining  light."  The 
first  prophetic  announcement  of  the  character  of  Je- 
sus, after  his  advent,  by  the  pious  Simeon,  was  that 
he  should  be  "  a  light  to  enlighten  the  Gentiles,  and 
the  glory  of  his  people  Israel,"  and  that  he  would 
"  be  set  for  the  fall  [by  repentance]  and  rising  again 
[to  a  higher  moral  state]  of  many  in  Israel."  That 
is,  the  Gentile  nations  should  be  enlightened  by 
Christ,  and  "  many"  of  the  Jewish  nation  would 
feel  condemned  in  the  light  of  his  dispensation,  and 
■would  rise  again  into  the  higher  moral  condition 
which  it  required. 

John,  although  himself  called  a  light,  affirmed 
that  he  was  not  that  light  which  was  to  raise  a  por- 
tion of  the  Jewish  people,  and  enlighten  the  Gentile 
nations.  "  He  w^as  not  that  light,  but  was  sent  to 
bear  witness  of  that  light" — "  that  was  the  true 
light  that  enlighteneth  every  man  that  cometh  into 
the  world,"  both  Jew  and  Gentile. 

Jesus  himself  claimed  to  be  "  the  light  of  the 
world."     "  I  am,"  said  he,  "  come  a  light  into  the 


IN    HUMAN    PROGRESS.  243 

world,  tLat  whosoever  believetli  in  me  sliould  not 
abide  in  darkness."  "  I  am  the  light  of  the  world  ; 
he  that  followeth  me  shall  not  walk  in  darkness,  but 
shall  have  the  light  of  life."  The  truth  which  he 
declared  as  the  basis  of  condemnation  was,  that 
"  light  had  come  into  the  world,  and  men  loved  the 
darkness  rather  than  the  light,  because  their  deeds 
were  evil." 

The  apostles  apprehended  distinctly  that  the  in- 
creased light  of  revelation  was  the  reforming  and 
the  elevating  power  of  the  nations.  They  not  only 
understood  the  fact,  that  revelation  was  the  moral 
life  and  light  of  men,  but  they  understood  the  rela- 
tions of  this  fact,  and  its  place  in  the  moral  progress 
of  the  world.  *'  The  darkness,"  said  they,  "is  past, 
and  the  true  light  now  shineth."  They  speak  of  the 
church  of  Christ  as  "  the  light  of  the  world,"  and 
Christians  as  "  the  children  of  the  light."  There  is, 
probably,  no  other  topic  which  suggests  illustrations 
to  the  minds  of  the  sacred  writers  more  varied  and 
beautiful  than  this  one  ;  and  there  is  none  other 
which  conveys  to  us  truth  of  more  vital  importance. 
There  is,  in  my  opinion,  no  figures  in  human  lan- 
guage more  striking  than  those  which  the  inspired 
writers  use  in  presenting  truth  under  the  symbol  of 
light,  not  only  in  the  past  and  present,  but  in  the 


244      KEY  ELATION    THE    MOTIVE-POWER 

apocalj'ptic  visions  of  tlie  future.  What  can  be 
more  strilving-  than   the  fio-ures    of  the  revelator. 

O  o 

Forecasting  the  period  of  the  Reformation,  he  speaks 
of  the  "  two  witnesses,"  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments, which,  clothed  in  sackcloth,  were  lying 
without  vitality  in  the  streets — these  are  elevated 
into  the  heavens,  from  which  position  they  attract 
the  attention  of  men,  and  send  the  rays  of  the  Ref- 
ormation down  into  their  hearts.  The  church  of 
Christ,  witnessing  for  truth,  is  spoken  of  as  "  A 
woman,  clothed  with  the  sun^  and  the  moon  under 
her  feet,  and  upon  her  head  a  crown  of  twelve 
stars." 

But  I  need  not  to  dwell  upon  the  fact  that  the 
Scriptures  do  claim  that  the  truth  of  revelation  is 
the  moral  light  of  the  world.  There  is  another  fact 
connected  with  this  subject ;  one  which  the  cursory 
reader  overlooks  ;  but  it  is  one  which  relates  to  the 
vital  power  of  truth — the  Scriptures  claim  that  there 
is  spirit  and  life  in  the  truth  which  they  reveal.  To 
this  life  of  the  light  I  ask  your  attention  before  the 
historical  analysis  which  is  to  follow.  It  is  well  to 
ascertain  accurately  the  apostolic  conception,  and 
the  breadth  of  the  Scripture  claim,  before  an  appeal 
to  external  testimony. 

To  see  an  evil  is  one  thing ;  to  lead  men  to  feel 


IN"    HUMAN    PEOGRESS.  245 

the  turpitude  of  evil,  in  itself,  in  themselves,  and  in 
the  sight  of  God,  is  quite  another  thing.  We  have 
noticed  this  fact  in  a  previous  letter.  It  will  not  be 
necessary  to  dwell  on  it  here.  Suffice  it  to  say, 
that  in  order  to  the  moral  progress  of  men  two 
things  are  necessary.  First,  that  men  should  see  the 
evil ;  and  second,  that  they  should  feel  such  a  sense 
of  the  evil  as  will  lead  them  to  turn  from  it,  and 
seek  a  higher  life.  Light  is  necessary  to  see  the 
evil.  A  sense  of  God  and  duty  with  that  light,  is 
necessary  to  lead  men  from  the  evils  which  the  light 
reveals. 

Now,  this  reproving  or  convicting  power  accom- 
panies the  light  of  revealed  religion.  There  may  be 
intellectual  culture  where  there  is  no  moral  purity. 
The  iirst  benefit  is  scarcely  a  blessing  without  the 
last.  A  knowledge  of  right  and  duty  only  renders 
one  a  greater  hypocrite  unless  he  have  moral  sense 
and  moral  life  sufficient  to  conform  to  his  own  con- 
victions. Now,  this  reproving  power,  which  leads 
men  to  feel- the  evil  of  sins  which  they  perceive,  the 
Scriptures  claim  for  themselves  as  a  spiritual  effi- 
cacy which  accompanies  revealed  truth.  Let  us 
notice  and  illustrate  this  fact. 

We  have  shown  elsewhere  that  truth  has  power 
over  the  moral  nature  of  men,   only  so  far  as  a 


246      REVELATION    THE    MOTIVE-POWER 

sense  of  God  and  duty  is  in  it.  There  needs  to  be 
life  as  well  as  light  in  that  trutli  wliicli  has  reforming 
power  in  the  world.  This  life-power  the  sacred 
writers  claim  as  belonging  to  the  gospel.  It  is  a 
power  by  which  men  feel  reproved  or  condemned 
for  the  sins  which  truth  reveals  to  them — a  power 
which  leads  them  to  reprove  evils  in  themselves  and 
others  "  made  manifest  by  the  light." 

Christ  is  spoken  of  as  being  not  only  the  "  light," 
but  the  "  life"  of  men.  The  second  Adam  gave  not 
only  light  to  the  intellect,  but  life  to  the  heart. 
He  was  a  "  life-giving"  as  well  as  a  "  light  giving" 
Spirit.  "  The  words  that  I  speak  unto  you,"  said 
Jesus,  "  they  are  spirit  and  they  are  life."  "  I  am 
the  light  of  the  world.  He  that  followeth  me  shall 
not  walk  in  darkness,  but  shall  have  the  light  of 
lifer  "  I  am  the  way,  the  truth,  and  the  life^ 
Now,  this  life,  or  reproving,  or  convicting  power, 
is  the  glory  of  the  gospel.  Without  this,  the  intel- 
lect may  be  enlightened,  while  the  conscience  will 
be  dead  and  the  heart  corrupt.  Hence  Jesus  said, 
"  Ye  will  not  come  unto  me  lest  your  deeds  should 
be  reproved."  The  one  thing  needful,  after  the 
understanding  is  enlightened  in  relation  to  moral 
duties,  is  this  reproving  life  in  the  conscience  of 
men,  which  produces  "  repentance  unto  life."     The 


IN    HUMAN    PKOGRESS.  ^247 

Holy  Ghost  is  personally  this  reproving  power.  The 
divine  Spirit  gives  life  to  the  soul,  by  the  truth. 
Christ  taught  that  when  the  Comforter,  which  is  the 
Holj  Ghost,  should  come  into  the  world,  "  He 
would  persuade — reprove — the  world  of  sin,  right- 
eousness, and  judgment." 

The  disciples  understood  that  without  this  moral 
power,  the  mere  intellectual  light  of  truth  would 
increase  sin  instead  of  producing  holiness.  Hence 
they  said,'  "  Christ  hath  made  us  ministers  of  the 
New  Testament :  not  of  the  letter,  but  of  the  spirit ; 
for  the  letter  killeth,  but  the  spirit  giveth  life." 
Paul,  in  his  letter  to  the  Christians  at  Ephesus, 
states  with  great  distinctness  the  effect  and  the  ne- 
cessity of  gospel  truth,  both  as  an  enlightening  and 
reproving  power,  (v.  13)  "  All  things  that  are  re- 
proved are  made  manifest  by  the  light ;  for  whatso- 
ever doth  make  manifest  is  light :  wherefore  [the 
gospel]  saith.  Awake,  thou  that  sleepest,  and  arise 
from  the  dead,  and  Christ  shall  give  thee  light." 
That  is,  the  light  of  revealed  religion  shows  the 
moral  evils  which  exist  in  the  heart  and  in  the 
world;  and  the  life-power  of  the  Spirit  accompany- 
ing that  light,  leads  us  to  feel  the  guilt  of  these 
evils. 

Notice,  now,  an  instance  of  the  influence  and 


248^    REVELATION    THE    MOTIVE-POWER 

practical  operation  of  tliis  moral  power  of  trutli,  as 
it  effected  the  reformation  of  tlie  world  in  the  apos- 
tolic age.  The  same  principle  we  shall  see  is  ap- 
plicable in  all  other  cases,  and  in  all  time. 

Take  the  case  of  the  city  of  Ephesus,  to  the 
Christian  inhabitants  of  which  Paul  writes  the  pas- 
sage we  have  quoted.  The  apostle  describes  this 
city  as  sitting  in  darkness,  and  her  citizens  as  cor- 
rupted by  the  practice  of  the  most  debasing  vices. 
He  says  to  the  Christians,  "  Ye  were  sometime 
darkness,  but  now  are  ye  light  in  the  Lord.  Walk 
as  children  of  the  light,  and  have  no  fellowship  with 
the  unfruitful  works  of  darkness,  but  rather  reprove 
them  ;  for  it  is  a  shame  even  to  speak  of  those  things 
which  are  done  of  them  in  secret."  Such  was  the 
celebrated  city  of  Ephesus  when  the  light  and  re- 
proving power  of  the  gospel  reached  her.  What 
was  necessary  in  her  case  ? 

Intellectual  light  was  not  what  the  men  of  Ephe- 
sus wanted.  They  lived  in  the  Augustan  age,  the 
noon-day  of  ancient  civilization.  They  lived  when 
the  light  of  reason  had  reached  its  meridian  in  the 
ancient  world.  They  lived  in  the  Eclectic  age,  when 
the  best  thoughts  were  collected  from  Plato  and  all 
the  great  thinkers  that  had  gone  before.  It  was 
the  age  of  Seneca  and  Pliny,  of  Tacitus,  Joseph  us, 


IN    HUMAN    PROGRESS.  249 

and  Plutarch,  the  crowning  authors  of  the  an- 
cient literature,  in  morals,  history,  science,  and 
religion. 

And  this  city  of  Ephesus  was  one  of  the  points  in 
Asia  where  art  and  letters  had  done  all  they  could 
do  for  human  culture.  Diana  of  the  Ephesians  was 
one  of  the  purest  shrines  at  which  the  old  world 
worshiped ;  and  her  temple  was  one  of  the  most 
magnificent  structures  that  was  ever  erected  and 
adorned  by  human  hands.  About  the  time  that  Paul 
wrote  the  passage  which  we  have  quoted,  describing 
the  appalling  corruption  which  prevailed  in  the  city, 
Pliny,  one  of  the  wisest  and  most  refined  men  of  his 
age,  speaks  of  Ephesus  as  "  one  of  the  luminaries 
of  Asia."  The  one  considered  her  as  full  of  light, 
the  other  looked  upon  her  as  full  of  darkness.  Both 
views  were  true,  according  to  the  standard  by  which 
the  writers  formed  their  judgment.  Pliny  saw  her 
as  the  seat  of  the  best  civilization  and  the  highest 
culture  that  a  people  without  revelation  had  ever 
attained.  But  underneath  the  glare  of  vain-glory, 
Paul  saw  a  degree  of  corruption  that  defiled  her 
very  heart.  She  was  "  a  whited  sepulcher,  full  of 
dead  men's  bones."  The  light  that  was  in  her  was 
darkness.     Those  who  lived  in  it  said,  "  Behold,  we 

see  1"  and  the  baptism  of  their  sacred  rites,  by  which 
11* 


250      REVELATION    THE    MOTIVE-POWER 

they  sought  to  purify  themselves,  only  infected  them 
with  baser  pollution. 

What  was  needed,  now,  in  order  to  reform  and 
save  this  people  ?  Was  it  civilization  ?  This  they 
had  attained  in  the  highest  degree.  Was  it  phi- 
losophy ?  Some  of  the  most  celebrated  schools 
were  in  this  city.  Was  it  perfection  of  art  ?  The 
best  models  of  the  age,  some  of  which  still  exist  as 
artistic  wonders  for  the  moderns,  w^ere  at  Ephesus ; 
and  it  is  recorded  that  the  personal  accomplishments 
and  taste  of  her  citizens  were  celebrated  throughout 
surrounding  regions.  All  these  she  had  (as  many 
cities  of  modern  Europe  have  still),  and  yet,  having 
eyes,  her  citizens  saw  not  the  prevailing  corruption ; 
and  having  ears,  they  heard  not  the  sentence  of 
condemnation  written  against  them. 

What  they  needed,  first  of  all,  was  light  to  dis- 
cern the  evil  nature  of  sin;  and  second,  that^er- 
sonal  sense  of  the  evil  which  would  lead  them  to  es- 
cape from  it,  and  endeavor  to  rescue  others.  Until 
they  saw  their  sin  and  felt  its  evil,  they  could  make 
no  advances  in  moral  character. 

Now,  Paul  af&rmed  in  relation  to  these  men,  and 
to  this  subject  two  things — that  whatever  they  saw 
to  be  evil  in  their  former  practice  was  made  manifest 
to  them  by  the  moral  light  of  the  gospel,  and  that 


IN    HUMAN    PROGRESS.  251 

whatsoever  makes  sin  manifest,  as  the  gospel  does, 
is  light. 

Once  more.  Notice  that  this  state  of  intellectual 
cultare  and  moral  blindness  was  not  confined  to  the 
old  world.  The  same  is  true  of  the  moderns. 
Our  own  country  does  not  remind  one  of  the  union 
between  culture  and  sin,  as  do  the  cities  of  Europe. 
Paris,  with  her  academy,  her  columns,  her  galleries 
of  painting,  her  statuary,  her  cathedrals,  her  phi- 
losophers, her  oratories,  her  taste  and  fashion,  her 
every  thing  that  is  deemed  a  mark  of  high  intellec- 
tual culture — Paris,  with  all  these,  is  the  brothel  of 
nations — a  city  where  every  species  of  moral  cor- 
ruption festers  and  infects  the  inhabitants,  and 
spreads  moral  contagion  over  the  continent. 

I  have  stood  in  her  galleries  at  Versailles  and  the 
Louvre,  and  felt  in  my  soul  that  her  models  of  art 
were  a  curse  to  the  people.  They  are  adapted  to 
gild  the  memory  of  those  who,  being  corrupt  in 
heart  and  profligate  in  practice,  are  now  suffering 
the  hell  that  awaits  selfish  and  impure  minds.  Their 
undraped  statuary  imparts  the  infection  of  the  old 
world's  guilt  to  the  new.  The  pictures  of  the  old 
masters,  and  from  them  down  even  to  David,  sanc- 
tify the  deeds  of  devils  under  the  name  of  kings 
and  cardinals.     Thus  the  popular  mind  is  led  to 


252      REVELATION    THE    MOTIVE-POWER 

reverence  "despots  and  evil-doers.  Tlieir  popular 
religion  is  as  impure  as  the  orgies  of  Ephesus,  and 
their  moral  corruption  as  great  as  hers.  In  mj 
opinion,  while  art  might  lose  something,  progress 
and  morality  would  gain  much,  if  the  next  outbreak 
in  Paris  should  destro}'  all  the  public  galleries  in 
the  city.  What  is  true  of  Paris,  is  true  likewise  of 
all  the  great  cities  of  the  continent  where  the  people 
are  without  the  light  of  revelation.  Culture  and 
crime  prevail  together,  to  some  extent,  even  in 
Protestant  cities ;  but  there  is  as  much  moral  dif- 
ference between  the  Protestant  cities  of  Geneva  and 
Aberdeen  on  the  one  hand,  and  Florence  and  Naples 
on  the  other,  as  there  is  between  daylight  and  dark- 
ness. 

Intellectual  culture  without  Christian  culture,  is 
a  painted  harlot,  who  lives  in  moral  night ;  and, 
decorated  in  the  tinsel  of  art  and  letters,  allures  the 
weak  and  the  wicked  to  hell.  Were  there  no  hope 
for  mankind  but  that  which  art,  letters,  and  intel- 
lectual culture  produces,  despotism  and  darkness 
w^ould  reign  over  the  earth,  and  the  hope  of  moral 
progress,  of  human  freedom,  and  human  happiness, 
might  be  abandoned  forever.  Men  might  be  as 
cultivated  as  was  Robespierre,  and  yet  become  as 
dai  k-minded  and  as  desperate  as  he.    They  might  be 


TN    HUMAN    PROGRESS.  253 

as  polisLed  externally  as  was  Dr.  Webster,  while  yet 
internally  they  might  be  as  wicked.  John  Newton 
had  the  same  mind  and  the  same  intellectual  culture 
when  engaged  in  the  slave-trade,  that  he  afterward 
possessed  when  bis  muse  charmed  and  purified  the 
hearts  of  all  those  who  listened  to  him. 

In  many  and  striking  forms  Christ  taught  men 
the  difference  between  intellectual  and  Christian 
culture.  The  one  without  the  other  is  "  the  whited 
sepulcher" — "  the  hidden  grave" — the  darkness  or 
"  night"  of  the  soul.  The  one  pertains  to  man's 
moral  nature — ^his  affections  and  his  conscience — 
the  other  to  his  intelligence.  The  one  without  the 
other  engenders  selfishness  and  hypocrisy ;  but  in- 
tellectual culture,,  used  and  sanctified  by  a  living 
conscience  and  pure  affections,  secures  all  human 
good  to  its  possessor,  and  leads  him  to  labor  for 
the  good  of  the  world.  When  the  intellect  moves 
to  the  work  of  human  elevation,  the  power  which 
gives  the  impulse  and  secures  permanency,  is  gen- 
erated in  the  heart  and  conscience.  Men  with  in- 
tellectual light  alone  may  make  advances  without 
moral  principles,  as  they  have  done  often  in  France, 
South  America,  and  elsewhere ;  but  without  moral 
principle,  which  gospel  faith  produces,  permanent 
progress  is  impossible. 


254      KEVELATION    THE    MOTIVE-POWER 

"With  these  princiiDles  and  discriminations  in  mind, 
I  now  proceed  to  show  that  all  human  progress,  both 
ancient  and  modern,  has  its  origin  in  the  truth  and 
power  of  revealed  religion  ;  and  that  without  this 
the  hope  of  reform  is  fallacious,  and  if  progress  were 
attained,  it  could  not  be  permanent, 

It  is  a  historical  fact  which  has  not  been  suffi- 
ciently noticed,  that  human  nature  is  always  below 
revelation.  This  fact  indicates  the  divine  origin  of 
revelation.  Great  discoveries  are  usually  the  pro- 
duct of  preceding  ages  of  thought.  One  mind  de- 
velops the  idea ;  but  it  is  the  fruitage  of  the  age 
ripened  in  that  mind.  A  pearl  is  found ;  but  the 
location  had  been  indicated  by  previous  researches. 
But  revealed  religion  is  something  different  from 
this.  It  is  separate  from  and  superior  to  the  thought 
of  the  age.  It  calls  the  wisdom  of  the  world  fool- 
ishness, and  introduces  a  new  stand-point  and  start- 
ing-point, around  which  it  gathers  what  was  valu-  . 
able  in  the  old,  and  destroys  the  remainder.  Hence 
it  will  alwaysbe  found  true  that  a  struggle  is  necessary 
to  bring  up  the  human  mind  and  keep  it  up  to  the 
level  of  revealed  religion,  and  that  revealed  religion 
produces  that  struggle.  The  human  mind  naturally 
falls  below  it ;  hence  frequent  struggles  are  neces- 
sary to  restore  it  from  its  relapses.     Even  those  who 


IN    HUMAN    PEOGEESS.  255 

profess  to  be  the  friends  of  the  dispensation,  retro- 
grade so  soon  as  its  power  is  in  any  wise  abated ; 
and  new  applications  of  the  same  power  have  to  be 
made  to  rescue  them,  and  bring  them  up  again 
nearer  to  the  requirements  of  their  dispensation. 

No  one  will  doubt  but  that  the  theology  of 
Moses  was  antagonistic  to  that  of  Egypt,  and  to 
that  of  all  the  nations  with  which  the  Israelites  had 
intercourse.  Its  great  aim  was  to  destroy  idolatry, 
to  remove  physical  and  moral  impurities,  and  estab- 
lish the  worship  of  the  one  tiue  God,  Jehovah. 
But  the  Jews  (although  all  their  traditions  were  in 
favor  of  monotheism,  and  all  their  experiences  such 
as  were  adapted  to  drive  them  from  idolatry)  were 
constantly  falling  into  the  vices  and  idolatries  of  sur- 
rounding nations.  Their  history  is  a  record  of  sad 
departures  from  the  purity  of  the  Mosaic  economy. 

Now,  the  question  is,  by  what  means  was  the  ad- 
vanced system  maintained  and  reformation  produced, 
when  the  people  had  again  dropped  down  to  their 
natural  level  ?  We  answer,  by  the  power  of  re- 
vealed truth,  and  by  this  alone.  "  Whatsoever  was 
reproved  in  Israel,  was  made  manifest  by  the  light," 
and  "  whatsoever  does  make  manifest  is  light." 

Their  defections  were  shown  to  them  by  referring 
them  to  the  light  of  the  law  of  Moses.     This  alone 


256      EEVELATION    THE    MOTIVE-POWER 

could  sliow  tliem  tte  evil  of  polytheism,  for  no 
other  system  existed  in  the  world  that  did  not  favor 
the  evil.  The  evil  being  revealed  hy  the  laiv,  they 
were  reproved  out  of  ilie  same  law  for  departing  from 
its  requirements,  and  in  this  way  alone  reformations 
were  produced.  The  instances  of  reformation  by 
the  light  and  power  of  the  revealed  religion  I  need 
not  to  enumerate,  especially  to  you.  The  relapses 
were  all  recovered,  and  the  nation  finally  delivered 
from  all  disposition  to  idolatry,  by  the  Bible,  and 
by  the  providence  of  God  working  in  harmony  with 
the  dispensation — punishing  departures  and  encour- 
aging reform. 

When  the  nation  was  almost  lost  in  the  surround- 
ing darkness,  the  Keformation  under  Josiah  was 
produced  by  the  law  alone.  "  The  Book"  found — 
as  Luther  found  it  afterwards  in  the  convent — was 
the  light  and  power  of  the  rescue. 

In  the  later  periods  of  the  dispensation,  the  old 
prophets  stood  up  in  "the  solemn  grandeur  of  their 
mission,  to  reprove  the  rulers  and  the  people,  and 
restore  them  to  obedience  to  the  law.  The  voices 
of  Jeremiah,  of  Isaiah  and  Ezekiel,  are  heard  in 
tones  of  sorrow,  instruction,  and  reproof,  reverberat- 
ing through  the  nation.  They  held  aloft  the  law, 
and  showed  to  the  people  that  the  judgments  of  God 


IlSr    HUMAN    PROGRESS.  257 

would  come,  or  had  come,  upon  them  for  departing 
jfrom  it.  They  gave  the  law  a  spiritual  import  in 
advance  of  what  it  had  before  [a  characteristic  of 
the  true  preacher] ;  they  enforced  it  by  the  authority 
of  God ;  and  spoke  almost  with  the  tongue  of  an 
evangelist  of  a  future  Messiah.  Thus,  in  the  light 
of  the  law  they  reproved  in  the  name  of  God :  and 
if  reformation  was  not  produced,  they  led  the  people 
to  feel  that  judgment  came  upon  them  for  disobe- 
dience ;  and  thus  their  captivities  and  sufferings 
tended  finally  to  cure  their  errors. 

Now,  I  need  not  say  to  you,  what  you  know,  that 
by  this  process,  and  this  alone,  was  the  worship  of 
one  God  at  length  established  in  the  world.  By  the 
law  of  Moses,  and  the  administration  of  the  reprov- 
ing prophets,  the  thing  was  accomplished,  and  in  no 
other  way.  Thus  the  law  was  a  schoolmaster  to 
bring  us  to  Christ.  When  the  evil  of  idolatry  was 
cured,  and  ideas  of  the  Messiah  created  by  the  Mo- 
saic ritual,  the  world  was  prepared  for  a  higher 
dispensation. 

One  other  topic  here  is  worthy  of  notice.  It  is  a 
part  of  the  history  of  monotheism  that  has  not  been 
sufficiently  studied.  I  allu^le  to  the  history  of  the 
Arabians,  as  it  connects  itself  with  the  Old  Testa- 
ment on  the  one  side,  and  with  Islamism  on  the 


258      EEVELATION    THE    MOTIVE-POWEK 

other.  The  Arabs  claim  Abraham,  the  first  re- 
former of  the  world,  as  their  flither.  Ishmael  was 
the  son  of  the  father  of  the  faithful ;  but  his  son  by 
a  foreign  wife ;  yet  to  Ishmael  also  was  the  promise 
given,  that  he  should  inherit — but  in  an  inferior 
degree — the  blessing  of  Abraham.  Other  descend- 
ants of  Abraham  were  mingled  in  Idumea,  constitut- 
ing two  lines  of  the  Abrahamic  family — the  Arabic 
and  the  Jewish.  They  have  the  same  relation  to 
the  true  religion  that  the  two  sons  have  to  Abra- 
ham, or  Esau  and  Jacob  to  Isaac.  Through  the 
true  sou  comes  the  true  gospel ;  the  other  is  a  de- 
gree removed  from  it.  But  the  fact  is,  that  both 
lines  recognize  and  worship  the  same  one  God : 
from  both  originate  the  reformers  of  idolatry.  The 
Arabs  are  now,  in  this  respect,  about  where  the 
Jews  were  before  the  coming  of  Christ.  They,  like 
the  Jews,  have  frequently  relapsed  into  the  idolatry 
and  vices  of  surrounding  nations  ;  yet  before  Moham- 
med there  were  many  reformers  who  restored  mono- 
theism in  some  of  the  tribes.  But  the  points  at 
which  this  history  connects  itself  with  our  subject 
are,  first,  the  Mohammedans  are  monotheists ;  sec- 
ond, they  worship  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Abraham 
and  Moses ;  third,  mark  it,  this  reformation  of  the 
Arabian  tribes^  which  restored  the  worship  of  the  one 


IN    HUMAN    PEOGRESS.  259 

Godj  was  effected  by  Mohammed  through  the  light  and 
power  of  the  patriarchal  and  Mosaic  dispensations. 
The  truth  which  the  prophet  uses  to  kill  idolatrj^  is 
drawn  from  the  history  of  Abraham  and  the  pre- 
cepts of  Moses.  The  14th  chapter  of  the  Koran  is 
entitled  "  Abraham."  The  patriarch  is  introduced 
as  praying  for  the  suppression  of  idolatry — "  Keep 
me  and  my  children  from  the  worship  of  idols  ;  they 
have  seduced  part  of  the  people."  The  authority  of 
Moses  is  likewise  recognized,  and  he  is  frequently 
introduced  as  denouncing  idolatry  and  commanding 
the  worship  of  Jehovah. 

Thus,  the  evidence  is  palpable  and  incontrovert- 
ible, that  the  worship  of  one  God  revealed  in  the 
Old  Testament  Scriptures,  has  been  the  reforming 
power  of  the  whole  world,  so  far  as  man  is  rescued 
from  idolatry.  The  two  branches  of  the  Abrahamic 
family  have  done  the  work.  Mohammedans  are 
now,  in  this  one  respect,  where  the  Jews  were  be- 
fore Christ,  and  where  the  unbelieving  Jews  are 
still.  All  that  they  have  in  advance  of  heathen 
polytheism  is  by  the  revealed  religion  of  the  Old 
Testament,  and  the  authority  of  Jehovah  as  there 
revealed.  All  that  we  have  in  advance  of  them 
starts  from  this  point.  This  brings  us  to  the  gos- 
pel dispensation — the  ^'irue  light  that  now  shineth^ 


260      REVELATION    THE    MOTIVE    POWER 

The  prophets  of  the  old  dispensation,  as  we  have 
noticed,  had  foretold  the  sevenfold  light  of  the  Mes- 
sianic age.  The  last  prophetic  utterance  (Mai.  iii. 
1-4)  announces  thiit  Christ  would  send  his  messen- 
ger (John  Baptist)  before  him  ;  that  he  would  sud- 
denly come  in  his  temple ;  but  that  his  dispensation 
would  be  "  as  a  refiner' s  Jire^^ — a  moral  power,  puri- 
fying the  world  and  the  church. 

John  Baptist  came,  and  affirming  that  the  king- 
dom of  heaven  was  at  hand,  he  called  the  nation 
to  repentance ;  thus  practically  promulgating  the 
truth  that  reformation  was  necessary  in  order  to 
enter  the  Messiah's  kingdom.  This  was  the  burden 
of  his  baptism — "  The  axe  is  laid  at  the  root  of 
the  tree."  The  separating  fan  is  in  the  hand  of 
the  Messiah.  He  will  se])arate  the  chaff  from  the 
wheat — gather  the  wheat  into  his  garner,  and  burn 
the  chaff  with  unquenchable  fire. 

Jesus  came,  preaching  reformation  and  a  higher 
life.  He  denounced  the  traditions  of  the  Jewish 
teachers.  He  selected  men  without  literary  or 
philosophical  attainment.  He  imbued  them  with  a 
new  spirit,  and  with  power  from  on  high  ;  and  com- 
missioned them  to  revolutionibe  all  forms  of  power 
in  church  and  state  ;  promising  divine  aid  and  su- 
pervision until  the  work  should  be  accomplished. 


IN    HUMAN    PROGRESS.  261 

You  know  the  result.  You  know  the  struggle 
and  the  success  of  the  truth  in  the  apostolic  age. 
As  it  was  in  Ephesus,  so  it  was  in  other  cities. 
When  Jesus  died,  the  old  world  had  its  greatest 
intellectual  light,  and  its  greatest  moral  darkness. 
The  truth  and  power  of  the  gospel  was  a  purifying 
element,  reforming  and  elevating  out  of  the  mass  of 
corruption  a  large  company  of  the  men  of  that 
age. 

In  establishing  a  new  system,  with  new  powers 
and  principles,  the  agency  of  the  Divine  Author 
must  be  interposed,  of  course  ;  just  as  every  new 
geological  advance  requires  divine  interposition. 
But  as  human  nature  is  always  below  the  revealed 
religion  which  is  designed  to  reform  and  elevate  it, 
the  corrupt  age,  and  the  dark  ages  which  followed, 
were  a  natural  sequence.  The  last  of  the  apostles 
was  not  in  his  grave,  and  the  visible  power  which 
established  the  New  Testament  had  scarcely  sub- 
sided, before  humanity  lapsed  into  error.  To  the 
light  of  the  apostolic  age  there  succeeded  clouds, 
darkened  by  depravity  and  tinged  by  superstition. 
When  earthly  power  could  not  subdue  the  church, 
it  allied  itself  with  her,  and  thus  corrupted  her 
truth  ;  and  from  the  period  of  the  adulterous  union 
between  church  and  state  the  liaht  of  truth  waned 


262      REVELATION    THE    MOTIVE-POWER 

into  the  total  eclipse  of  the  dark  ages — ages  without 
a  Bible. 

But  out  of  the  darkness  a  light  sprung  up  which 
has  shone  more  and  more  down  to  our  day,  Now, 
our  last  inquiry  is,  Has  revealed  religion  been  the 
source  and  the  power  of  reformation  and  moral  pro- 
gress in  the  world,  under  the  Christian  dispensation, 
and  from  the  dark  ages  until  now  ? 

We  need  not  inquire  concerning  the  causes  which 
immediately  introduced  the  dark  ages.  Suffice  it 
to  say,  that  during  the  period  from  the  sixth  to  the 
fifteenth  century,  the  light  of  revelation  was  vailed. 
The  Scriptures  were  no  longer  in  the  vernacular 
tongue  of  the  people.  Both  church  and  state  were 
without  a  Bible.  The  dawn  of  reformation  begins 
with  Wicklif  and  Huss.  Their  translations  and 
preaching  ante-date  the  art  of  printing,  and  the 
other  great  inventions  of  the  fifteenth  century.  The 
art  of  printing  no  doubt  greatly  aided  the  Reforma- 
tion. But  printing  in  itself  has  no  reformatory 
moral  power  in  it.  Whether  it  advances  or  retards 
the  civil  and  moral  progress  of  men  depends  on  the 
things  printed.  The  enemies  of  the  Reformation 
used  the  press  as  freely  as  the  reformers.  The 
press  infected  the  continent  with  atheism  in  the  days 
of  Voltaire,  and  the  press  strengthened  the  power 


IN    HUMAN    PROGEESS.  263 

of  despotism  under  Eobespierre.  The  press  can  do 
no  more  than  disseminate  the  thought  of  the  age, 
whether  that  be  bad  or  good.  Truth  is  stronger 
than  error ;  hence  the  press  is  an  auxiliary  in  the 
world's  enlightenment.  But  light  without  moral 
principle  has  no  real  reformatory  pov/er.  It  does 
not  create  conscience,  and  hence  wants  the  element 
of  permanent  moral  progress. 

Luther  is  identified  as  the  man  of  the  Eeformation. 
"Whence  did  Luther  draw  his  power?  A  benighted 
monk,  he  found  a  copy  of  the  Bible  in  the  convent 
of  Erfurth.  The  Bible  enlightened  Luther.  He 
translated  it  into  the  vernacular  tongue  of  his  country, 
and  it  enlightened  the  people.  Every  shaft  that  the 
reformers  hurled  at  the  Papal  demon  was  drawn 
from  the  Bible.  Nine  tenths  of  the  literature  of 
the  Eefor-mation  was  biblical.  That  the  Bible  made 
the  reformers  is  as  true  as  that  the  reformers  pro- 
duced the  Reformation  hy  the  same  means.  About 
the  facts  in  the  case  there  can  be  no  controversy. 
The  dark  ages  were  dissipated,  and  the  Reformation 
accomplished  by  the  light  and  power  of  revealed 
religion. 

You  have,  no  doubt,  read  the  recently-published 
history  of  the  Dutch  Republic,  by  Motley.  If  you 
have  not,  get  it  at  once.     It  will  give  you  the  de- 


264      REVELATIOJ^    THE    MOTIVE-POWER 

tailed  statement  of  tlie  struggle  between  the  Bible 
power  and  the  Papal  devil  in  the  Netherlands — a 
struggle,  the  successful  issue  of  which  placed  Hol- 
land in  the  forefront  of  the  civilization  of  the  age, 
furnished  an  asylum  for  the  persecuted  in  other  na- 
tions, and  developed  a  degree  of  moral  progress 
greatly  in  advance  of  the  times.  That  the  Bible 
power  achieved  this  moral  victory  for  humanity, 
freedom  and  religion  can  not  be  questioned. 

It  is  conceded  that  the  basis  for  the  Eeformation 
in  England  was  laid  by  Tindall's  translation.  Be- 
side this,  during  the  struggle  in  the  Netherlands, 
multitudes  of  the  persecuted  fled  to  England,  and 
carried  the  seeds  of  Bible  truth  with  them  across  the 
Channel.  Thus  was  begun  the  progress  that  was  ren- 
dered permanent  by  the  translation  under  King  James. 

Another  stage  of  progress  in  civil  and  religious 
freedom  was  initiated  by  the  Puritans.  To  them  it 
is  conceded,  even  by  Macaulay,  that  England  owes 
all  that  places  her  in  advance  of  other  Protestant 
nations  of  Europe.  To  them,  and  the  Scotch  and 
Dutch  Puritans,  we  owe  all  of  religious  liberty  that 
we  possess  in  America.  And  yet  who  dare  deny 
that  all  these  stages  of  progress  were  gained  by  the 
Bible  power  ?  The  questions  of  those  ages  of  pro- 
gress were  Bible  questions.     The  conscience  that 


IN    HUMAN"    PEOGRESS.  265 

strengtlaened  true  moral  lieroes  to  endure  and  to 
triumph  was  Bible-made  conscience.  The  issues 
between  them  and  tlieir  opponents  were  Bible  is- 
sues. Luther's  moving  issue  was  justification  bj 
faith  against  the  error  of  justification  by  penance 
and  indulgences.  The  Dutch  and  the  Scotch  fought 
against  the  powers  of  darkness,  and  triumphed  under 
the  same  banner.  The  Puritans  inscribed  on  their 
banner  "  Bible  faith  and  practice  against  forms." 
The  pure  Bible  was  their  watchword.  Wesley's 
Reformation  was  purely  religious,  but,  like  preceding 
advances,  it  was  founded  on  Bible  principle — expe- 
rience against  profession.  So  the  principle  of  Penn 
was  non-conformity  to  the  world,  against  a  worldly 
church.  But  more  than  all,  it  was  Bible  faith  which 
gave  strength  of  heart  and  conscience  and  will  to 
these  reformers ;  so  that  they  braved  dangers,  suf- 
fered persecutions,  subdued  the  wilderness,  and 
achieved  all  the  civil  and  religious  progress  which 
the  world  possesses. 

This  historic  analysis  might  be  run  through  all 
the  details  of  human  progress.  So  far  as  the  hu- 
man families  have  advanced  in  moral  culture,  with 
its  concomitant  blessings  of  civil  liberty  and  social 
comfort,  that  advance  has  been  achieved — even  in 
limited  localities — ^by  Bible  light  and  power. 
12 


2G6      REVELATION    THE    MOTIVE- POWER 

But  this  long  letter  must  be  closed.  Take  an 
epitome  of  instances  and  illustrations. 

In  my  school-days  we  had  a  map  in  our  geo- 
graphies which  gave  us  an  apprehension  of  the  de- 
gree of  civilization  existing  in  different  countries  of 
the  globe.  Those  regions  which  were  the  most  ad- 
vanced in  civil  and  moral  culture,  were  light ;  the 
utterly  pagan  regions  were  black ;  those  regions 
partially  civilized  were  partially  radiated.  Now, 
upon  that  map,  which  I  took  pains  to  inquire  for 
and  examine  very  recently,  the  degree  of  national 
enlightenment  corresponds  precisely  with  the  amount 
of  Bible  knowledge  prevalent  among  the  people. 
There  is  no  exception  to  this.  It  is  universal  over 
the  whole  earth.  The  Bible  is  the  light  and  life  of 
the  moral  world,  just  as  distinctly  as  the  sun  is  the 
light  and  life  of  the  physical  world.         ^ 

The  local  illustrations  of  this  fact  are  striking. 
I  have  had  the  privilege,  in  various  portions  of  the 
old  and  new  world,  of  noticing  evidences  that  have 
left  lasting  impressions  on  my  heart.  Allow  me,  in 
conclusion,  to  give  you  a  transcript  of  these  im- 
pressions. 

Various  states  of  Germany  contain  a  mixed  popu- 
tion — some  Protestant,  some  Papal  inhabitants. 
Now,  just  in  proportion  to  the  Protestant  element 


IN    HUMAN    PROGRESS.  267 

does  moral  progress  and  civil  liberty  exist.  Take 
Belgium  as  the  starting-point.  Travel  up  the  Rhine 
and  throuoh  the  German  states  toward  Rome,  and 
the  amount  of  progress  can  be  gaged  accurately  by 
the  amount  of  Bible  knowledge  among  the  people. 
As  3^ou  approach  Rome,  the  seat  of  Papal  power 
and  superstition,  the  darkness  can  be  felt.  There 
the  Bible  is  totally  withheld  from  the  masses,  and 
the  despotism  of  the  rulers,  and  the  degradation  of 
the  people,  and  the  superstition  of  the  whole,  are 
almost-  equal  to  that  of  Central  Asia  ;  while  vice  and 
crime  are  more  prevalent  than  they  are  in  Central 
Africa. 

Pass  from  Paris — at  the  same  time  the  Athens 
and  the  Sodom  of  the  continent — ^to  Geneva,  and 
thence  to  the  Sardinian  Alps. 

Bible- reading  Protestants  preponderate  in  Swit- 
zerland ;  hence  civil  freedom  prevails,  and  there  is 
piety  and  probity  among  the  peasantry,  which  con- 
trasts favorably  with  the  Catholic  French.  But  in 
passing  from  Geneva,  by  Lake  Leman  to  Chamouni, 
you  pass  from  the  Protestant  canton  Yaud  into  the 
Catholic  canton  Yalais.  Here  moral  night  follows 
day  without  an  intervening  twilight.  The  dress,  the 
physiognomy,  the  habits  of  the  people  change  at 
once.     In  one  you  meet  no  beggars.     In  the  other 


268      REVELATION    THE    MOTIVE-POWER 

the  road  is  tliroDged  with  them.  In  both,  the  peas- 
ants are  poor ;  but  in  one  there  are  evidences  of 
honest  industrj^,  and  you  meet  open,  frank  counte- 
nances ;  in  the  other  poverty,  with  uncouth  garments 
and  sinister  aspect.  The  more  broken  character  of 
the  country  may  have  something  to  do  with  this ; 
but  the  Bible  power  makes  a  difference  that  can  be 
felt  by  the  traveler. 

Pass  with  me,  now,  through  Scotland  and  Ireland. 
Scotland  has  one  curse  in  common  with  Ireland — 
the  habit  of  using  ardent  spirits  prevalent  among  all 
classes.  But  apart  from  this,  the  peasantry  are  equal 
to  any  in  Europe.  In  the  cities  of  Edinburg  and 
Glasgow  there  is  a  degree  of  poverty  and  vice  in 
some  of  the  poorer  streets  (as  in  High  and  Cow- 
gate  streets,  Edinburg)  which  js  revolting.  I  saw 
nothing  like  it  in  Aberdeen.  On  inquiring  of  an 
intelligent  gentleman  the  reasons  of  the  phenome- 
non, he  said,  most  of  the  mass  of  depravity  accumu- 
lated in  these  pens  was  made  up  of  Irish  Catholics 
and  similar  elements ;  and  that  scarcely  any  of  it 
originated  with  the  Bible-reading  population  of  the 
country. 

Pass  from  Glasgow  to  Belfast,  in  Ireland ;  and 
from  Belfast  through  Dublin  to  the  south  of  the 
island.     In  this  journey,  as  you  leave  the  Bible- 


IN    HUMAN    PROGRESS,  269 

reading  north,  and  pass  to  the  Catholic  south,  3^ou 
pass  from  light  and  morals  into  the  heart  of  one  of 
the  most  degraded  and  superstitious  regions  that 
there  is  in  Europe.  Perhaps,  after  the  masses  of 
Rome  and  Naples,  there  is  none  more  so  in  Chris- 
tendom. 

Now,  sir,  look  with  me,  a  moment,  over  the  dif- 
ferent sections  of  our  own  country.  You  will  agree 
with  me  that  the  most  intelligent  and  moral  popu- 
lation of  the  world,  take  them  en  masse,  is  in  that 
portion  of  the  Union  where  the  people  are  most 
generally  instructed  in  the  Bible  principle  and  pre- 
cept ;  while  in  other  sections  of  our  land  vice  and 
ignorance  prevail  just  in  proportion  as  the  peo- 
ple are  deprived  of  the  Bible  ;  or  in  proportion  as 
they  suppress  Bible  truth  in  professedly  Christian 
churches.  In  the  one  section  principles  and  practices 
are  maintained  that  would  have  appalled  the  men 
of  the  same  section  twenty  years  ago-  In  the  other, 
I  hope  the  light  is  advancing. 

It  is  likewise  true  that  all  the  moral  reforms  for 
which  our  land  is  distinguished,  so  far  as  they  have 
succeeded,  have  been  initiated  and  advanced  by  the 
Bible  light  and  power  in  the  hearts  and  consciences 
of  reformers.  The  temperance  movement  began  in 
the  church  ;  and  the  process  of  enlightenment  was 


270      REVELATION    THE    M  0  T  I  Y  E- P  OW  E  R 

carried  forward  almost  exclusively  by  Christians. 
Search  the  record,  and  you  will  find  that  the  im- 
pulse and  the  direction  were  both  given  b}'  Bible 
readers.  I  know  the  final  appeal  has  been  to  leg- 
islation ;  but  legislation  can  do  nothing  until  suffi- 
cient light  is  disseminated  and  sufficient  conscience 
produced  in  relation  to  the  evil  to  be  reformed. 
Our  legislation,  in  some  States,  has  gone  in  advance 
of  the  moral  sentiment  of  the  masses,  and  reaction 
has  ensued  ;  and  the  reform  will  never  become  prev- 
alent until  the  light  and  moral  power  of  the  Bible 
produce  sufficient  conscience  to  sustain  it.  There 
only  is  the  moral  principle  that  creates  perseverance 
— there  the  benevolence  that  prompts  to  persistent 
self-denial  for  human  good. 

So  in  relation  to  the  anti-slavery  reform.  In  En- 
gland, the  Christian  sentiment  of  the  nation  began, 
carried  forward,  and  consummated  the  work  of 
emancipation.  In  this  countr}'-,  the  first  fifteen  years 
were  spent  entirely  in  moral  endeavor  by  Bible 
men.  It  is  true  that  a  large  portion  of  the  churches 
withheld  their  influence,  especially  those  churches 
rendered  conservative  by  wealth,  or  connection  with 
the  sin  ;  but  after  all,  it  is  true  that  in  every  region 
of  the  free  States  where  the  reform  was  urged  p6r- 
severingly,  and  one  advance  after  another  secured, 


IN    HUMAN    PROGRESS.  271 

in  every  sucTi  instance,  it  will  be  found  tliat  tlie 
Bible  power  was  the  impulse,  and  Christians  the 
agents  in  the  work.  There  are  parties  who  claim  to 
be  anti-slavery  men,  par  excellence^  of  whom  this  can 
not  be  said  ;  but  these  are  self-elated  and  impracti- 
cable parties,  united  by  idiosyncrasies,  and  utterly 
infeasible  in  their  aims,  as  they  are  uncharitable  in 
their  spirit. 

But,  enough.  I  appeal  to  you,  my  dear  sir, 
whether  the  idea  that  human  progress  can  be 
achieved  without  the  Bible  be  not  a  fallacy,  branded 
as  such  both  by  the  principles  developed  in  the  pre- 
cediog  letter,  and  by  the  historical  statements  and 
illustrations  of  the  present  one  ?  My  logic,  as  you 
were  pleased  to  call  it,  is  verified  by  the  facts  of 
history.  Kevealed  religion  is  the  Alpha  and  the 
Omega  of  human  progress. 

Yours,  my  dear  sir,  for  that  light  which  makes 
evil  manifest,  reproves  it  when  made  manifest,  and 
thus  abates  it  in  the  world. 

J.  B.  W. 


APPENDIX. 


EXTRACT  FROM  THE  NEW  ENGLANDER  OF  MAT,  1856. 

Our  previous  article*  refers  the  whole  question  of  man's  im- 
mortality to  the  will  of  God.  An  argument  from  nature  is  only 
our  inference  of  that  will  from  the  disclosures  of  God  in  the 
material  universe  and  in  the  consciousness  of  the  human  soul. 
In  these,  and  especially  in  the  lattei-,  we  find  evidence  of  a  God 
of  wisdom,  justice,  and  goodness.  From  these  attributes  the 
inference  is  irresistible,  to  a  divine  wiU,  ordaining  endless  ex- 
istence to  all  to  whom  such  an  existence  would  be  an  endless 
progress  in  virtue  and  bUss.  But  in  regard  to  those  irrevocably 
moving  toward  an  opposite  moral  destiny,  the  voice  of  nature, 
though  unmistakably  predicting  &  future  life  as  a  necessity  of 
divine  justice  and  moral  government,  seems  to  some  not  so 
explicitly  to  assure  immortality.  Contrawise,  rather,  the  very 
attributes  of  the  Godhead,  which  guaranty  to  the  good  an 
everlasting  being,  might  be  regarded  as  necessarily  dooming  the 
wicked  to  ultimate  annHiilation ;  or  at  least  as  creating,  in  be- 
half of  that  doctrine,  so  strong  a  presumption  as  to  be  entitled 
materially  to  mochfy  and  control  our  interpretation  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. 

Our  argument  thus  far  has  been  engaged  in  combating  such 
a  presumption ;  in  showing  the  insufficiency  of  the  grounds  and 
the  invaUdity  of  the  assumptions  on  which  it  rests ;  and  that 

*  New  Englander,  Feb.,  1856. 
12* 


274  APPENDIX. 

our  ignorance  of  the  moral  system  and  economy  under  whicli 
we  now  are,  ill  entitles  us  to  dogmatize  in  regard  to  that  which 
is  to  be.  The  very  same  difficulties  and  mysteries  embarrass 
the  existence  of  evil  in  the  present  world  that  are  supposed  to 
forbid  its  existence  in  the  eternal  future,*  and  they  require,  as 
far  as  we  can  see,  that  the  wicked  should  never  have  been  at 
all,  not  less  than  that  they  should  forever  cease  to  be.  Our  ig- 
norance of  the  law  or  principle  which  underlies  the  origin  and 
continuance  of  evil,  makes  us  incompetent  to  Umit  its  scope  and 
duration.  But  reasoning  from  the  analogy  of  nature,  we  should 
infer  from  its  existence,  spite  of  seeming  mysteries  and  difficul- 
ties, its  not  improbable  co-existence  with  them  hereafter. 

Still  there  are  minds  in  our  times — minds,  too,  which  we  re- 
spect for  sagacity,  erudition,  and  piety — that  do  take  this  term 
of  doom  in  another  sense.  We  raise  no  question  of  their  candor 
or  sincerity,  but  we  can  not  resist  the  impression  that  with  them, 
though  without  their  consciousness,  natural  theology  is  father 
to  revealed  ;  and  that  philosophy  and  prejudgment  of  what  the 
word  of  God  must  teach,  have  much  to  do  with  their  interpret- 
ing what  it  does  teach.  They  contend  that  everlasting  punish- 
ment means,  or  at  least  is  compatible  with,  annihilation.  They 
maintain  that  everlasting  punishment,  even  if  everlasting  be  taken 
in  the  sense  of  endless,  which  they  affirm  can  be  questioned, 
does  not  of  necessity  im^^Xy  everlasting  existence;  that  its  import 
may  be  satisfied  by  a  punishment  whose  effects  are  everlasting, 
i.  e.,  one  from  wliich  there  shall  be  no  recovery. 

They  claim,  moreover,  that  such  a  hmitation  of  the  term  is 
necessary  to  reconcile  it  with  other  Scripture,  where  words  sig- 
nificant of  utter  and  total  extinction  of  being  are  apphed  to  the 
future  destiny  of  the  wicked,  such  as  death,  destruction,  "  ever- 
lasting destruction,"  perishing,  perdition,  and  the  like.     They 

*  This  is  at  least  a  doubtful  statement.  The  past  is,  in  all  the  series 
below  man,  a  progressive  system — the  higher  types  being  advanced, 
while  those  unfitted  for  now  and  better  conditions  are  not  restored 
but  destroyed. 


APPENDIX.  275 

tell  us,  moreover,  that  Jesus  Christ  is  presented  in  the  Scrip- 
tures as  the  author  of  life  ;  and  that  eternal  hfe — by  which  they 
understand  eternal  existence — is  promised  by  him  to  those  only 
who  believe  in  him ;  while  death,  or  the  negation  of  existence, 
is  denounced  as  the  doom  of  those  who  believe  not ;  and,  more- 
over, that  the  agent  or  instrument  of  future  punishment,  "fire" 
is  one  whose  nature  is  to  consume,  not  conserve  in  pain,  so  that, 
whether  it  is  to  be  interpreted  figuratively  or  literally,  it  is  evi- 
dently designed  to  convey  the  idea  of  the  utter  destruction  of 
its  victim.  Such  are  the  grounds,  philological  and  exegetical, 
upon  which  the  argument  for  annihilation  is  defended,  and  on 
which,  presumptions  from  nature  being  abandoned,  it  must  be 
sustained,  if  at  all. 

JSTow  the  simple  question  before  us,  we  premise  here,  is.  What 
is  a  fair  interpretation  of  language  ?  Not,  what  is  suitable  to 
our  notions  of  G.od's  nature  or  government ;  or  what  may  arm 
the  gospel  with  the  most  powerful  incentives ;  or  what  may 
seem  to  us  most  safe  or  expedient  to  promulgate ;  or  what  most 
enhances  the  value  of  the  soul.  Such  considerations  we  discard 
as  alien  to  our  present  inquiry,  and  tending  only  to  perturb  the 
mind  with  influences  having  no  connection  with  evidences  of 
truth  or  falsehood.  It  is  not  ours,  in  determining  a  question  of 
divine  doctrine,  to  inquire  after  what  is  safe  or  prudent  to  be 
taught,  or  what  is  requisite  to  give  motive  power  to  the  gospel, 
or  dignity  to  the  human  soul.  These  questions  are  God's ; 
and  we  best  seek  their  solution  when  we  inquire,  what  is  truth  ? 
what  is  God's  teaching  and  God's  arrangement  ?  Let  us  not 
presume  to  be  wiser  than  God,  or  to  understand  better  than  he 
the  true  forces  of  the  gospel.  Nor,  again,  let  us  permit  the 
logical  and  philological  import  of  language  to  be  overruled  by 
our  fears  for  God's  honor,  or  the  integrity  of  his  wisdom,  justice, 
and  benevolence.  God  will  care  for  his  own  honor,  and  he 
knows  perfectly  what  is  congruous  with  his  wisdom,  justice,  and 
goodness.  God  hath  spoken  I  we  have  to  do,  simply,  with  the 
inquiry,  What  hath  he  said  ?     God  hath  spoken  to  man.     He 


276  APPENDIX. 

has  spoken,  then,  according  to  the  laws  of  human  language,  and 
is  to  be  interpreted  according  to  the  laws  of  human  speech. 
The  question  before  us  now,  let  us  bear  in  mind,  then,  is  not 
one  of  philosophy,  but  purely  of  criticism,  philologic  and  exe- 
getical.  It  beais  througli  awful  deeps,  it  is  true,  but  they  are 
deeps  beyond  our  philosophic  soundings ;  and  there  is  the  more 
need,  manifestly,  that  Ave  follow,  in  clhlLllike  trust  and  simphcity, 
the  divine  voice. 

Our  present  argument  claims,  that  approached  and  interpreted 
in  this  spirit,  the  Scriptures  do  teach  the  immortal  existence  of 
the  wicked,  by  direct,  dehberate,  formal  declarations,  as  well  as 
by  implication,  in  numerous  passages ;  and  that  the  words  and 
phrases  alleged  to  convey  a  contrary  doctrine,  are,  when  applied 
to  the  soul,  not  only  susceptible  of  a  limitation  and  modification 
of  import  which  may  avoid  such  contradiction,  but  are  actually 
employed  in  the  famihar  and  constant  usage  of  the  Scriptures, 
in  such  application,  with  such  hmitation  and  modification  of 
meaning.  It  claims,  moreover,  that  those  terms  which,  applied 
to  the  body,  denote  dissolution  and  destruction,  find,  when  pred- 
icated of  the  soul,  their  analogy  most  perfectly  met,  and  have 
an  especial  appositeness  of  significancy  in  indicating  spiritual 
ruin ;  that  they  are  actually  in  common  use  in  the  Scriptures, 
without  denoting  extinction  of  being,  but  with  the  unquestion- 
able significancy  of  a  spiritual  corruption  ;  and  that  the  mind  at 
once  recognizes  the  fitness  of  the  usage,  and  feels  that  the  im- 
port of  the  terms  is  satisfied,  and  the  analogy  of  signification, 
required  in  the  application  to  the  soul,  is  fully  met  in  such  usage. 
They  can,  therefore,  thus  interpreted,  be  reconciled  with  the  di- 
rect, obvious  import  of  the  passages  declarative  of  the  future 
doom  of  the  wicked,  without  doing  any  violence  to  language  ; 
whereas  the  contrary  process — controlling  the  direct,  explicit, 
and  declarative,  by  the  indirect,  the  allusive,  incidental,  and  in- 
ferential— violates  a  common  canon  of  intei'pretation. 


APPENDIX.  277 


RULING  TEXTS. 

Let  us  now  examine  some  of  those  passages  of  Scripture  that 
may  seem  entitled  to  be  regarded  as  ruling  texts  on  this  ques- 
tion ;  that  is,  those  that  with  the  most  dehberateness,  distinct- 
ness, and  solemn  formality,  set  forth  the  process  of  final  judg- 
ment ;  or  with  the  most  fullness  and  explicitness  characterize 
the  future  doom  of  the  lost.  And  first,  perhaps,  among  these, 
the  judgment  scene  in  the  25th  chapter  of  Matthew,  demands 
our  attention,  as  entitled,  because  of  its  calm,  dehberate,  didac- 
tic character,  and  its  freedom  from  the  excitements  and  coloring 
of  imagination  or  passion,  as  well  as  its  greater  expHcitness  and 
fullness,  to  rank  among  the  leading  passages — the  "  lociclassici" 
of  Scripture — on  the  theme  of  human  destiny.  The  imagery 
employed  is  purely  for  the  purpose  of  instruction  and  elucidation, 
not  rhetorical  or  emotive.  The  spirit  pervading  it  coheres  with 
the  time  and  sceno.  It  is  a  case  where  he,  who  is  himself  to 
be  the  future  Judge,  sitting  on  the  brow  of  Olivet,  in  secluded 
and  calm  converse  with  the  disciples,  who  are  waiting  to  receive 
from  his  lips  the  word,  that  they  may  proclaim  it  through  ages, 
sets  forth  the  process  and  sentence  of  the  last  judgment,  and 
the  separate  destinies  of  the  two  great  moral  divisions  of  our 
race.  The  shadows  of  the  hastening  crucifixion  are  falling 
around  the  speaker.  Life  is  entering  the  solemnity  of  its  last 
hour.  Tlie  theme,  the  speaker,  the  time,  the  scene — all  are 
above  poetry,  above  passion  ;  too  awful  for  rhetoric ;  all  belong 
to  severe  reason  and  pure  truth.  Word  and  phrase  now  mean 
all  they  utter.  No  abatement  is  required  for  amplification  or 
embellishment,  for  enthusiasm  or  fanaticism.  Terrible  as  they 
are,  stiU  we  must  regard  them  as  dispassionate  and  severely 
^true,  even  as  the  doom  they  utter,  belonging,  if  ever  did  words 
uttered  in  tliis  world,  to  the  intensely,  utterly,  eternally  real 
Let  us  so  interpret  them.  They  present  before  us  the  judgment 
scene  as  connecting,  in  the  divine  government,  two  eternities ; 


278  APPENDIX. 

and  with  its  double  aspect  toward  the  everlasting.  The  Son  of 
man  has  come  in  his  glory ;  before  him  are  gathered  all  nations ; 
the  division  is  made,  and  sentence  and  execution  thus  proceed. 
"  Then  sliall  the  King  say  to  those  on  his  right  hand,  Come,  ye 
blessed  of  ray  Father !  inherit  the  kingdom  prepared  for  you 
before  the  foundation  of  the  world."  *  *  *  « ^^d  then 
shall  the  King  say  also  to  those  on  the  left  hand,  Depart,  ye 
cursed,  into  everlasting  fire,  prepared  for  the  devU  and  liis  an- 
gels."* "  And  these  shall  go  away  into  everlasting  punishment, 
and  the  righteous  into  life  eternal"! — or  everlasting ;  the  epithet 
in  the  original  is  the  same  as  that  just  applied  to  the  punish- 
ment. 

Such  is  Jesus  Christ's  statement  of  the  final  destiny  of  man. 
It  is  final;  there  is  nothing  beyond — no  reappearance  or  re- 
adjudication.  From  that  judgment  scene  they  pass  to  return  no 
more.  They  disappear  in  the  unapproachable  light,  or  the  im- 
penetrable darkness.  One  would  at  first  suppose  the  words  of 
Christ  in  this  case  were  so  explicit  and  positive  in  assertion  of 
the  immortality  of  man — good  or  evil — that  they  could  not  be 
made  more  so ;  that  the  hermeneutics  that  could  evade  them 
would  defy  any  grasp  of  human  language.  But  still,  as  their 
import  has  been  questioned,  let  us  aim  to  develop  it  in  formal 
propositions.  Now,  no  one  will  dispute  that  a  text  asserts  the 
immortality  of  the  wicked,  if  the  three  following  propositions  can 
be  established  in  regard  to  it : 

1st.  It  describes  the  doom  of  the  wicked  after  death. 

2d.  It  predicates  of  that  doom  eternal  duration. 

3d.  Tfiat  doom  implies  the  continued  existence  of  its  subject. 

Let  us  apply  these  propositions  to  the  above  passage  : 

First,  The  passage  relates  to  the  doom  of  the  wicked 
AFTER  DEATH.  This  is  Unquestionable.  The  scene  is  the  last 
judgment ;  the  sentence,  the  final  reward  ;  the  history,  the  last 
disclosed  in  the  empire  of  God. 

♦  Matt.,  XLxv.,  34-41.  f  Ibid ,  46. 


APPENDIX.  279 

Second,  The  doom  affirmed  of  them  is  of  eternal  dura- 
tion. The  adjective  of  time  used  asserts  this ;  it  is  the  one 
that  would  naturally  have  been  employed  to  express  that  idea. 
It  answers  in  import  and  usage  to  its  English  representative 
eternal  and  everlasting.  By  its  probable  etymology  {al6vioc  al6v, 
dec,)  it  denotes  the  always-being,  or  ever-being;  its  radix 
being  the  adverb  of  perpetuity,  or  continuance.  In  actual  usage, 
it  regularly  carries,  in  all  its  modifications,  the  sense  of  time 
unlimiiedif  not  illimitable.  It  is  the  proper  adjective  of  eter- 
nity, so  much  so,  that  in  common  usage  of  the  Scriptures  it  is 
applied  characteristically  to  God,  signifying  his  eternity.*  The 
original  Greek  had  no  stronger  epithet  of  duration.  It  is  true 
that,  like  its  EngUsh  representatives,  it  is  sometimes  attached  to 
objects  of  a  measurable  date.  But  such  usage  belongs  to  rhe- 
torical and  poetic  diction,  or  to  the  language  of  imagination  and 
passion,  or  appears  with  obvious  limitations  in  the  nature  or  re- 
lations of  the  subject  to  which  it  attaches ;  (as,  e.  g.,  everlasting 
hills ;  everlasting  statutes,  etc.).  Such  cases,  however,  indicate 
and  explain  themselves.  Apart  from  such  diction  and  limitation, 
expressed  or  impUed,  the  term,  of  its  own  proper  force,  carries 
the  idea  of  eternal  duration.  But  in  this  text  is  no  such  dic- 
tion ;  nor  is  there  any  such  limitation,  unless  in  the  nature  of 
the  soul,  to  suppose  which,  begs  the  entire  question  by  assum- 
ing the  very  point  at  issue,  or  in  some  popular  notion  of  the 
soul's  mortality,  prevalent  at  the  time — but  such  notions  did  not 
prevail  among  those  to  whom  Christ  spake. 

For  again,  amid  the  strongest  proofs  that  Christ  here  designed 
by  the  term  "  everlasting"  to  convey  the  idea  of  endless  dura- 
tion, is  the  historic  fact  that  the  Jews,  with  their  ideas  of  the 
immortality  of  the  soul,  must  have  so  understood  it.  The  Jews 
in  Christ's  time — all  who  believed  the  soul  would  exist  at  all 
after  death — believed  it  would  never  die.  For  this  fact  Jose- 
phus  expressly  and  exphcitly  testifies :  "  The  doctrine  of  the 

*  Rom,  xvi  22.    Sept.  Gen.  xxi.  33.    Isa.  zl.  28,  etc. 


280  APPENDIX. 

Essenes  is  this :  That  bodies  are  corruptible,  and  the  matter 
they  are  made  of,  not  permanent ;  but  that  souls  are  immortal 
and  continue  forever.  *  *  *  ^mj  indeed  the  Greeks  seem 
to  me  to  have  followed  the  same  notion,  when  they  allot  the 
islands  of  the  Blessed  to  their  brave  men,  and  to  the  souls  of 
the  wicked,  the  region  of  the  ungodly  in  Hades ;  where  such 
persons  as  Sisyphus,  Tantalus,  and  Ixion,  and  Tityus  are  pun- 
ished ;  which  is  built  on  this  first  supposition  that  souls  are  im- 
mortal ;  whereby  bad  men  are  restrained  by  the  fear  and  expect- 
ation they  are  in,  that  although  they  should  he  concealed  in 
this  hfe,  they  should  suffer  immortal  punishment  after  death." 

Of  tiie  Pharisees,  Josephus  also  testifies,  "  they  say  that  all 
souls  arc  incorruptible,  but  that  the  souls  of  bad  men  are  sub- 
ject to  eternal  punishment."  But  the  Sadducees  take  away 
the  belief  of  the  immortal  duration  of  the  soul,  and  the  punish- 
ments and  rewards  in  Hades.* 

Again,  elsewhere,  he  testifies,  "  The  Pharisees  believe  that 
souls  have  an  immortal  vigor  in  them ;  that  under  the  earth 
there  will  be  rewards  or  punishments  according  as  they  have 
lived  virtuously  or  viciously  in  this  life ;  the  latter  are  to  be  de- 
tained in  an  everlasting  prison,  but  that  the  former  shall  have 
power  to  revive  and  Uve  again.  *  *  *  g^^  ^^g  doctrine  of 
the  Sadducees  is  that  souls  die  with  the  bodies."! 

Such  is  the  testimony  of  the  Jewish  historian  cotemporary 
with  Christ.  The  sects  embracing  the  doctrine  of  immortality 
were  the  great  majority  of  the  nation  ;  those  rejecting  it,  rejected 
a  future  life  altogether.  Our  Saviour,  therefore,  in  Uiat  dis- 
course, must  have  been  understood  by  those  who  heard  him,  aa 
meaning,  by  the  term  in  question,  strictly  everlasting ;  and  he 
knew  he  must  be  so  understood.  Of  course,  using  it  without 
limitations,  he  designed  to  be  so  understood ;  and  such  must  be 
its  meaning  in  the  passage. 

*  Josephus'  Wars  of  the  Jews:  Book  II.  Chap.  viii.  Sects.  11-14. 
f  Antiquities  of  the  Jews:  Book  XVIII.  Chap.  i.  Sects.  3-4. 


APPENDIX.  281 

That  then  it  should  have  here  its  proper  import  of  ever- 
during,  would  seem  plainly  inferrible  from  the  nature  of  the 
subjedj  from  the  time  and  scope  of  the  scene  described,  from  the 
notions  prevalent  on  the  theme  of  discourse  amid  those  to  whom 
the  description  was  addressed,  and  from  the  definition  of  the 
term  in  the  context,  in  application  to  a  subject — the  life  of  the 
righteous — to  which  none  think  of  applying  a  restricted  signifi- 
cation. Instead,  then,  of  the  word  everlasting  being  here  re- 
stricted in  its  natural  signification,  it  appears  to  us  expanded  by 
the  character  of  its  subject,  and  by  the  occasion  and  the  audi- 
tory, to  its  infinite  capacity. 

As  predicated  of  the  soul  and  especially  the  doom  of  the  soul 
after  the  last  judgment,  we  may  say  without  begging  the  ques- 
tion, the  terms  everlasting  and  eternal,  to  the  common  mind 
and  usage,  carry  the  idea  of  endless  duration.  For  however 
imperfect  and  unsettled  may  be  the  notions  of  men  in  regard 
to  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  they  do  not  think  of  using  or 
understanding  the  terms,  eternal  and  everlasting,  in  relation  to 
it  or  its  future  destiny,  in  a  hmited  import.  The  mind  natur- 
ally, if  admitting  the  existence  of  the  spirit  after  death  at  all, 
conceives  of  it  as  among  the  most  enduring  of  things.  Espec- 
ially would  a  limited  import  be  attached  to  an  epithet  describing 
the  final  doom  of  the  soul,  because  that  doom  is  the  very  utter- 
most syllable  of  its  history.  It  covers  the  infinite  future.  Bear- 
ing this,  the  soul  disappears  from  view  forever.  No  ulterior 
judgment,  no  reversal  of  doom  is  intimated.  Every  aspect  of 
the  scene  and  transaction  looks  to  the  everlasting.  The  person- 
ages with  differences  of  moral  character  and  history,  are  dis- 
missed from  that  throne  on  destinies  that  shall  turn  back  no 
more.  If  the  scope  of  any  scene  or  action  could  sustain  in 
common  usage  the  unlimited  extent  of  the  time-term  employed, 
surely  this  were  such  an  one.  If  that  doom  were  not  to  cover 
the  unlimited  future,  and  that  hfe  and  punishment  were  to  be 
consummated,  and  have  an  end,  we  should  expect,  in  a  professed 
exhibit  of  man's  destiny,  som.e  intimation  of  it. 


282  APPENDIX. 

Moreover,  our  Lord  obviously  would  not  have  used,  in  such 
a  case,  language  which  he  knew  would  have  been  misappre- 
hended, with  no  explanation  or  caution,  or  any  intimation  at 
all  guarding  against  misconstruction.  And  certainlj^  he  would 
not  have  done  so,  kno^\'^ng  as  he  must,  that  by  the  use  of  the 
same  word  in  the  next  clause,  where  none  would  think  of  lim- 
iting it,  viz.,  in  application  to  the  happy  destiny  of  the  righteous, 
he  would  necessarily  be  understood  by  hearers  and  readers  as 
fixing  its  meaning.  According  to  all  rules  of  fair  and  perspicu- 
ous speech,  the  term  which  applied  to  the  life  of  the  righteous 
in  one  clause  embraces  endless  being,  can  not  in  one  imme- 
diately adjacent  shrink  into  finite  and  measurable  date. 

Thirdly.  This  doom  implies  continuance  of  being  in  its  ob- 
jects. The  words  everlasting  punishment  imply  this.  This 
might  seem  too  obvious  and  self-evident  for  argument.  But 
some  contend  that  these  words  may  import  simply  a  punishment 
everlasting  in  its  consequences  (one  from  which  there  shall  never 
be  a  recovery),  and  may  thus  be  fully  satisfied  by  the  annihilation 
of  those  punished.  But  that  these  words  have  not  this  meaning 
here,  is  clear  fi'om  the  following  considerations.  This  is  not  the 
natural  and  obvious  import  of  the  words  ;  that  import  by  which, 
according  to  the  laws  of  sound  criticism,  we  ought  to  interpret 
language,  in  tjie  circumstances  in  which  this  was  uttered,  and 
according  to  which  the  phrase  was  unquestionably  understood 
by  those  who  heard  it.  We  think  we  certainly  are  not  mis- 
taken in  feeling  that  "  everlasting  punishment"  is  not  the  term 
in  which  one  would  naturally  have  expressed  the  idea  of  the 
extinction  of  being ;  some  other  word  than  "  punishment" 
would  have  been  used.  Again,  that  is  not  the  proper  meaning 
of  the  phrase  employed.  The  word  translated  punishment, 
Kolaai^^  is  a  word  denoting,  not  the  consequence,  but  the  actt 
of  punishing.  It  is  a  verbal  noun,  a  nomen  actionis,  equivalent 
not  to  an  opus  operatum  (a  work  operated),  but  to  the  operation. 
It  indicates  not  result  so  much  as  process.  It  is  stronger  than 
the  common  word  rendered  punishment,  the  word  employed 


APPENDIX.  283 

■with  its  adjective  by  Josephus  to  indicate  eternal  or  immortal 
punishment  (Tt/xupla).  It  is  more  significant  than  atonement, 
amercement,  expiation,  penal  satisfaction,  etc.  It  corresponds 
more  nearly  to  our  word  chastisement^  and  might  not  inaptly 
have  been  venAeved  punishing  instead  of  punishment.  It  is  a 
noun  of  infliction.  Its  prime  etymological  idea  is  that  of  maim- 
ing, cutting,  mutilation,  and  the  like.  In  common  usage  it  im- 
phes  conscious  suffering  in  its  object.  It  is  the  same  word  which 
is  rendered  torment  in  1  John,  iv.  18  ;  where  it  is  said,  "  There 
is  no  fear  in  love,  because  fear  hath  torment."  This  is  the  only 
other  passage  exhibiting  this  word  in  the  New  Testament. 
If  translated  in  this  manner  in  the  clause  under  inspection,  am- 
biguity of  meaning  would  have  been  impossible.  We  regard 
the  word,  therefore,  as  implying  its  proper  force,  and  because 
of  the  popular  behef  amid  those  to  whom  the  word  was  ad- 
dressed, the  conscious  existence  of  its  subject.  Again,  we  in- 
fer this  doom  carries  the  idea  of  conscious  being,  because  of  the 
adjunct  attached  to  the  instrument  of  the  punishment  predicated 
(whether  in  reality  or  figure  is  immaterial).  That  instrument 
or  adjunct  is  called  everlasting  fire.  But  why  apply  the  epithet 
everlasting  to  the  agent,  unless  to  convey  the  idea  of  everlasting 
action  ?  and  what  pertinency  in  calling  the  action  everlasting, 
if  the  suffering  were  not  to  be  so  ?  It  certainly  would  seem 
frivolous  to  say  the  fire  was  everlasting,  but  the  torment  inflicted 
was  not  so.  The  only  pertinency  in  the  use  of  this  adjective  of 
endless  duration  attached  to  the  penal  agent,  is  found  in  the 
implication  of  correspondent  duration  of  the  suffering  of  those 
subjected  to  its  power.  The  sentencing  to  a  fire  which  shall 
burn  forevermore,  would  be  naturally  understood  to  be  a  sen- 
tencing to  burn  in  it  forevermore.  The  adjunct  were  nugatory 
otherwise.  So  of  everlasting  fire  here  ;  it  were  childish  to  ac- 
cumulate epithets  upon  the  fire  for  any  other  end.  Would  God 
attempt  to  create  terror  by  a  mere  sonorous  and  idle  play  of 
words  ?  Would  our  Saviour — would  the  great  Judge — resort 
to  a  mere  trick  of  language,  a  childish  illusion  of  the  imagination  ? 


284  APPENDIX. 

What  matters  it  to  souls  absolutely  and  forever  to  be  burned 
up,  whether  the  fire  that  consumes  them  should  raven  on 
through  eternal  ages,  or  is  to  be  quenched  vrith  the  extinction 
of  their  own  being  ?  whether  they  are  consumed  in  a  bonfire  or 
in  the  conflagration  of  worlds  ?  If  I  am  to  be  drowned,  what 
matters  it  whether  it  be  in  the  rivulet  or  the  Atlantic  ?  It 
surely  were  unworthy  of  the  awful  dignity  and  truthfulness  of 
the  scene,  for  the  Judge  in  his  sentence  before  the  assembled 
universe,  thus  to  dilate  on  the  everlastingness  of  the  fire,  when 
he  knew  the  culprits  sentenced  would  soon  be  forever  beyond 
its  burning.  Let  it  burn  on  forever,  it  could  not  reach  them. 
What  would  its  endless  rage,  even  should  it  devour  the  uni- 
verse, be  to  them  in  the  bosom  of  eternal  nothing  ?  Certainly 
the  sentence  of  the  last  day  will  not  attempt  to  frighten  the 
condemned  by  a  cliildish  play  on  unreal  fears.  If  tne  applica- 
tion of  the  epithet  everlasting,  to  the  fire,  does  not  import  that 
the  lost  ones  punished  by  it  are  to  be  everlastingly  exposed  to 
its  fury,  it  would  be  hard  to  acquit  the  final  sentence  of  falsify- 
ing the  obvious,  designed,  and  inevitable  impression  of  language, 
by  a  mere  artful  equivoque  worthy  of  a  Pagan  oracle.  But  the 
scene  and  the  speaker  drive  such  a  thought  wide  as  the  univeree 
aloof. 

Suppose  the  sentence  had  been,  Depart,  ye  cursed,  into  fire 
that  shall  burn  a  hundred  years,  or  a  thousand  years,  who  would 
think  otherwise  than  that  those  sentenced  were  to  burn  in  that 
fire  one  hundred  or  one  thousand  years  ?  We  should  all  think 
of  nothing  else  than  taking  an  attributive  of  duration  attached 
to  the  agent  of  punishment,  as  an  assignment  of  the  date  to  the 
punishment  itself.  We  could  discern  no  reason  for  its  introduc- 
tion at  all  if  not  for  this  purpose.  So  in  case  of  the  sentence  of 
the  great  day,  if  the  time-term  of  the  fire  is  not  meant  to  be 
that  of  its  infliction  of  pain,  we  can  see  no  reason  why  it  is  in- 
troduced here.  Surely  the  eternal  judgment  were  no  theme 
nor  scene  for  admitting  an  artful  fetch,  by  indirection  convoying 
a  fallacy  it  shrinks  from  directly  uttering.     And  surely  he  from 


APPENDIX.  285 

whose  lips  these  words  fell — who  was  himself  truth  and  love, 
and  in  whose  mouth  guile  was  never  found — would  not  abuse 
and  afflict  men  with  unreal  terrors ;  and  especially  by  terrors 
which,  as  is  contended,  while  afflicting  man,  only  dishonor  God. 
So  subsequently  in  applying  the  epithet  everlasting  alike  to  the 
life  of  the  righteous  and  the  punishment  of  the  wicked,  in  con- 
tinuous clauses,  we  can  not  suppose  our  Lord,  in  pronouncing 
the  irreversible  doom,  would  palter  in  a  double  sense  of  the 
same  word,  making  the  life  endless,  but  the  penal  suffering  not 
so.  Is  everlasting  punishment,  in  the  common  sense  and  usage 
of  words,  simply  punishment  irreversihle  ? — punishment  from 
which  there  shall  be  no  recovery,  irrespective  of  continuance  of 
being  ?  Does  it  not  imply  something  felt  everlastingly  ?  Does 
an  infliction  merely  extinctive  of  existence  correspond  to  its 
common  idea  ?  Should  we  think  of  saying  of  a  man  shot  or 
beheaded,  that  he  departs  into  everlasting  punishment,  even 
though  there  is  no  recovery  from  it,  and  its  effects  are  enduring  ? 
Is  this  a  common-sense  acceptation  of  the  phrase  ?  Would  not 
the  common  mind  understand  more,  and  must  it  not  have  un- 
derstood more  by  this  when  Christ  uttered  it  ?  A  punishment 
which  the  victim  should  forever  suffer  and  from  which  he 
snould  find  no  rescue,  nor  release,  nor  reprieve  ?  Punishment 
continuing  impUes  existence  continuing;  everlasting  punish- 
ment, everlasting  existence.  In  common  parlance  you  would 
no  more  speak  of  the  punishment  of  the  annihilated  than  of  the 
uncreated. 

Again,  the  words  "  everlasting  punishment"  imply  everlasting 
continuance  of  being,  because  our  Saviour  must  have  been  con- 
scious they  conveyed  thai  signification  to  those  listening  to  him, 
and  his  use  of  them,  knowing  they  would  be  thus  understood, 
makes  him  responsible  for  intending  that  signification.  The 
Jews,  with  the  notions  entertained  among  them  of  the  future 
destiny  of  the  soul,  could  have  interpreted  them  in  no  other 
way.  The  theory  of  extinction  after  judgment,  had  no  place 
among  them ;  the  penal  sufferings  of  the  wicked,  if  there  were 


286  APPENDIX. 

any  at  all  hereafter,  were  without  end.  But  it  is  an  established 
canon  of  interpretation,  which  construes  the  words  of  a  fair  and 
truthful  speaker  in  tlie  meaning  in  which  he  is  conscious,  while 
uttering  them,  they  will  be  understood  by  the  hearer.  And 
evidently  the  Jewish  mind,  hearing  words  in  customary  use  to 
indicate  a  common  beUef,  with  no  indications  of  departure  from 
that  usage,  could  only  understand  by  eternal  punishment  an 
immortal  woe.  This  Jesus  knew,  and  this  he  must  have  in- 
tended. 

We  tliink,  then,  our  three  propositions  are  proven  in  case  of 
this  text.  It  relates  to  the  future  doom  of  the  wicked,  affirms 
of  that  doom,  eternity,  and  implies  the  continued  conscious  ex- 
istence of  its  objects,  viz.,  wicked  souls. 

This  is  the  most  full,  formal,  and  methodic  statement  of  the 
process  and  sentence  of  the  final  judgment  to  be  found  in  the 
Scripturps,  and  taken  in  all  its  aspects,  ma}'^  be  regarded  as  not 
less,  certainly,  than  any  other,  a  text  entitled  to  rule  on  this 
topic.  We  pause  here  to  inquire,  then,  whether  the  above  pas- 
•  sage,  to  one  looking  at  it  by  itself,  and  bringing  to  its  examina- 
tion no  theory  to  be  estabUshed,  and  no  prejudgments  to  be 
sustained,  would  not  seem  perfectly  decisive  of  the  whole  ques- 
tion ;  so  plain  and  so  unambiguous,  indeed,  that  there  could  be 
no  mistaking  its  intent  ?  Dr.  Post. 


THE    END. 


/-^ 


c 


IfnfTtirtnmfnSlfmr 


